DazedandConfused

Morality aside (which is one of the problems with our society in that we too often put morality aside and simply make business decisions based only on dollars and cents) as far as entertainment goes, I am thoroughly entertained by wall to wall Bills coverage. However, if the Bills were to pick up the horrible soap opera known as Micheal Vick then almost all football issues will become secondary in the wall to wall Vick coverage. Picking him up would be a total disaster for those interested in the Bills for football purposes.

I think reality for the Bills has to be the question of can we win with our #2 QB for a max of three games. I think this is the real question because if we were actually to have a QB where a legitimate case could be made that our #2 is good enough to be the starter for an extended period then the local media and some vocal fans would start the drumbeat that our starting QB should be benched in favor of our #2 if we want to win. The archetype of the back-up QB for the Bills is a Frank Reich style player. No one would even consider the notion of benching Jimbo in favor of Reich in part because Jimbo was so productive and also in part because Reich never gave that normal athletes sense that he wanted to move up the food chain to start. Even better Reich had an accomplished enough college career and played such a productive role for Kelly as essentially another set of eyes and QB coach that he was a valued contributor to this team whether he started or not. On of the side effects of the RJ/DF QB battles is that in any case where the #2 QB shows any sign that he might be able to take the #1 job for an extended period, the media default here in WNY is to turn this into a QB battle which like it or not ends up being at least distracting (Bledsoe/JP) if not divisive for the team and its fans (JP/Edwards). What the Bills can best hope for is that their injury prone starting QB (by my definition which is a player who loses PT to three different types of injuries in two season reverses this tendency and that if he is hit with injury yet again that either Fitzpatrick exceeds what he has shown in his brief career to actually be able to be a credible alternative for 3 or fewer games or Hamdan develops into something he has never shown. The big problem for the Bills is that the media and the fan base have never shown the maturity to not invest in a QB controversy as they attempt to sell ads or fill column inches. It could work out, but we will see.

I will try to rack my feeble brain during some earlier day light hour as to who it was, but I am pretty sure of a case in the past decade where the Bills cut a player in the first set of cuts during pre-season only to surprisingly sign him back on the PS when all was said and done. Teams scoured the waiver wire pretty thoroughly after the second cut looking for players who just missed out on making the roster and might be good players to pick off the team that originally signed them and it was pretty clear the Bills had jettisoned this player early so that he would draw less attention for opposing teams. It was not said but I assumed that the Bills had let the cutee know that that he had zero chance of making the permanent roster, but that they were cutting him early so he would draw less interest from other teams but not to worry the Bills planned to resign him. Even though this move might have constituted a transpression of league rules the chances of any blowback on this are quite small as no one is gonna believe a rookie who made this claim without some fairly substantial proof and it cuts against the interest of any cut player to make this claim anyway. The team would certainly tell the player to feel free to sign elsewhere if a deal materialized but after an early cut then who wants to take the risk to sign such a player. To directly answer your question as to why the Bills would cut a player whom they felt had decent potential. The answer is that they MIGHT cut him if they felt he was a good project but they felt he had no chance to make the roster this year and even probably next year without some work. By cutting him now but either hinting or even promising to him that he keep his powder dry and the Bills would (or likely would) resign him they both heavily dampen interest in him (he is on the wire but on the wire as a player judged not worthy of a draft choice by everyone and even getting cut by the Bills so early as to make everybody wonder how bad he must have been or what the medical professional saw that got him bounced so early. Who knows for sure but if this specimen does not sign with another team quite soon this is an indicator that either he is so bad he merited an early cut and no one has signed him OR there may be something afoot with the Bills wanting to dampen interest and resign him to the PS anyway. Who knows for sure but the amount of though I have already given to this Machievellian probably too clever by half theory is probably more analysis than this move merits.

It certainly appeared to me on the face of it demographically that Bell appeared to be amazing physical specimen who admit it or not showed well against lower level talent and came from a collegiate program where the likelihood struck me that he was almost certainly probably two years and at least one from being able to make an NFL roster. The thing which gave me interesting pause was that I think the Bills signed him to a two year contract when the norm for a UDFA like him would have been a one year make good or goodbye deal. My GUESS was that the 2 year deal rather than being some sign he would make the roster was that this rookie was clearly a project who needed at least two years of practice before he would make the roster. It was a compliment to his size and athleticism that they gave him an extra year than the norm but this was more likely a clear sign they did not see him helping out. The early cut then might be best explained by the Bills coaches and braintrust already deciding they had erred in their decision to develop him, but be better explained by the Bills assuring him he would be a good project, but that though the Bills still had a solid interest in him they would maximize their chances of no one poaching him from the Bills ownership would if they had a never even had him play pre-season by cutting him before anyone saw he was going to be rehired pn the PS. The Bills would have to risk him being hired by someone else when he dd get cut, but if they assured him he would be signed by the Bills as soon as they could they actually might be able to park him and get him signed as quick as they can,

I think the neat thing for a Bills fan about this perspective is that it gives us three candidates: Josh Reed whom you like for the demonstrated productivity you site, Parrish for the demonstrated speed and productivity as a punt returner that I like, and Steve Johnson for the end of the season production he showed last year. All three have reasons on paper why they well might be able to prove to have similar production over a full season: Reed is a vet with very good production as a rookie he did not build upon to become a consistent star in his second year, but maybe the vet has enough to produce IF (the big F) Schonert has a productive O scheme overall, Parrish is a proven producer as a return guy and has shown he is a gamer in the slot, BUT he has not demonstrated he can survive and produce over a full season as a starting WR YET. Johnson has shown some good chops as a youngster and his two TDs in limited PT as a youngster last year provides a chance with his good route running that he MAY become the real deal. From my perspective, I see Evans as a definite speed threat who has been knocking on the Pro Bowl door the last couple of years and in a good O should be able to knock the door down. I see TO as an idiot who has always worn out his welcome and his like all lucky folks getting older. However, he has demonstrated a certainly diminished from his prime but still easily worthy of the #2 slot even with a diminished level of production from his HOF level production a couple of years back. TOs MO is to be a solid citizen for a year and then to melt down, I look forward to having him for a good year and we will see then if he either shows age have not ravaged his play AND has finally taught this rich idiot something, or instead we say thanks and do not bid for him or tag him next year. The Bills clearly strike me as being able to put two WRs out there who demand a double teams. If any D is already commiting of its 11 defenders to guard or at least seriously watch out for these two, that simply opens up huge possibilities for a third WR to play one on one against second tier talent IF 1. The Bills OL gets its act together well enough that it at least holds it own 5 pr 6 (if the TE is a good blocker or a receiveing threat themselves) on the 6 remaining defenders (the dts and single coverage on our #3 WR leaves 6 D players). 2. Lynch or whomever is playing RB is good enough to be a threat in a single back base offense. 3. Edwards has enough of an understanding of the opposing D and a quick and accurate release that gimmicks like the zone blitz or stunts do not send in a sacker unblocked. If this is the basic situation, this fan feels pretty secure that either Parrish will survive, or Reed will return to the form he hinted at as a rookie, or Steve Johnson will live up to expectation. This offense MIGHT be scary good based on the players assembled but under Fairchild and in Schoenert's first year as OC the coaches have not demonstrated an ability to use the players they have as well as they should be able to be used. We will see.

Parrish is injury prone because he is a little guy. However, one of the reason he gets injured is that he had no fear of contact and I have been impressed with his willingness to sacrifice his body manning the slot from tome to time for the Bills. I think he has shown pretty good hands over his career. I think folks exaggerate any drops he has (truth is even the best drop some and just wait until we see a real case of the drioppsies when we see TO). However, it is rational to tolerate the drops when the player is a weapon in other regards. TO is a proven weapon and I think Parrish has demonstrated in real life as a great PR guy that he is a threat. I blame the Bills O coaches for not developing a solid O plan rather than Parrish who clearly has the speed and the moves. Add to that he has shown his tough attitude by playing the middle of the field, I think Parrish is my choice for #3 WR. I'd have Johnson duel with Johnson for our 4th WR position and may the best man win and move when/if Parrish gets hurt. With McKelvin and McGee we are way deep at the return game so I do mind risking Parrish to get hurt and I posh, pusj, push the receiving game with our no huddle and 3WRs as our base O.

The likely key to a Johnson performance is going to be how the WRs interact and play off of each other and what they will force an opposing D to do. Evans speed forces an opponent to put their fastest CB om him and likely demands and over and under Dt by the opponents. If TO shows he has enough left in the tank and retains his nose for the endzone, he also is going to demand a Dt to defend his RAC ability (he will be downright scary on slant patterns if he is performing. Twin Dts essentially force the opponent into zone coverage and if the Bills press the peddle to the metal Johnson MIGHT be able to take advantage of the single coverage or picking on the zone situation this presents a third WR. However, what seems more obvious is to see the Bills using the scary fast speed of Parrish or the proven in his rookie year ability of Josh Reed to run precise routes and pick a part an opposing D as he did in his rookie year with Moulds/PP commanding so much attention. I do not think Johnson has the speed of Parrish or the experience of Reed to make him the choice candidates for #3 or #4 WRs, but it would be neat competition which makes the TEAM real difficult threat to deal with if Johnson becomes a force.

I think the key thing to remember here is that it ain't the NFL of your Grandma's day anymore where the owners pretended it was a free market system and team ownership was a test of individuals with the best man (or Georgia Frontiere if she inherited from a dead husband) won. The key was the mid-80 when the owners used the lockout of the players to kick the butt of the unionistas led by Ed Garvery who demanded 52% of the total gross receipts. This would have not only made the deal between the NFL and NFL a partnership but lay the ground for calling the players the majority partners. They kicked the players butts so badly that in fact the player leadership which was a college educated crew (a side-effect of the MFL owners fostering a situation where unlike most of the other major sports leagues they got the NCAA buttressed by your tax dollars paying for state colleges like most of the Big Ten, University of Texas, U Nebraska, etc to pay for training their potential players. The badly weakened NFLPA still colluded with the owners to run a player draft which eliminated the rights of adults to sell their services to any team they wanted) listened and bought into the schemes of a bunch of smart NYC lawyers. The NFLPA threatened after the mid 80s spanking to simply dissolve their union and to thus force the individual team owners to actually live in a free market where they simply competed financially to buy the best players they could buy. The rule for running the league would simply have been the Golden Rule- He who has the gold and is willing to spend it willie-nillie on football rules. The irony here is that in the face of a choice between sticking to free market principles and creating a race between lack of competitive balance and the uncertainty of producing a sustainable product that labor disputes brings with it as to which would kill the NFL first, instead the owners opted for a CBA which even with the fig leaf of the designated gross was now a partnership between the owners and players. Even this fig leaf was ripped away when with the newest CBA, Upshaw and the NFLPA insisted that now the cap would cover the entire gross and they dictated that the % of the total gross allocated to the players needed to start with a 6. The final deal was for 60.5% as the old guard embodied by Ralph took every penny that the players deemed to give them. In the end only Ralph and the silly Bengals were unwilling to scream thank you sir can I have another as the NFLPA and Tagliabue bent them over the table and dictated the outline of the final deal. In the end, what ruled the day was the dollar. Even with only 39.5% of the total receipts the owners could not get paid big bucks by the networks that they ever saw with the old deal where they had their pride but in the end $ ruled the day. This is particularly true with a significant number of teams mortgaged out the eyeballs so that they could not withstand long at all the loss of revenue if the networks refused to pay them the big bucks because they did not deliver football games that the networks sell commercials around. My guess is that in the end the team owners fold like trailer in a tornado as there are simply too many bucks to be made from settling for a CBA which gives them 39.5% if a lot rather than having 60%+ of nothing,

New construction is generally so much cheaper in our society that it makes the cost of carefully moving old construction so it is not substantially destroyed impractical. The answer is really a practical one in terms of how much of the old stadium do you wish to move in toto or in pieces and then reassemble them and still end up with a facility with all the advantages of new built technologies and that meets all building codes (codes which folks chafe at as they hate regulation, but with the recent meltdown of the economy of what happens without clear and solid regulation). It generally is such a better deal economically to do more than move old facades or retain them in place and build around them so one can have a pretense of real connection to the past and have all the cost advantages which our economic system gives to new builds. My sense is that the good news is that the Bills are actually taking a serious look at building a new stadium in Buffalo. However, the Bills are doing smar business if they do not want this word to leak out as we are probably talking about relatively few sites along the water front in Buffalo where a stadium would be built. As soon as word got out that the Bills were seriously looking at building a new stadium in Buffalo, the price of any unacquired land and the prices of any nearby land would grow. In addition, Ralph has built a huge public demand for the Bills to stay and this demand can be translated in getting local governments to pay a ton of the development costs (probably through setting up an authority similar to the one looking to build new sports stadiums in NYC) and not only get this public subsidy but get total control and profit-taking from the new stadium. By keeping their interest non-public the Bills can force a deal which maximizes their benefits and totally insulates them from any costs. From my perspective, given the demand for development in downtown Buffalo and the fact that the Bills are one of the things which gives a common interest to a region as badly divided as almost any in the country between the haves and the have nots, as far as being raped by the welfare queens of the Buffalo Bills lining up at the taxpayer teat, I say rape away.

Exactly. I think that running a spread offense would really help our running game alot. The no huddle would be one way of doing this (though it does demand a particular skillset and abilities from a QB which Jiimbo who clearly was pretty much a moron in other facets of life had big time so that he read opposing Ds and ra-n the no huddle in an amazingly successful manner) I think Edwards has shown good ability to make reads, some surprising mobility and can throw the tight pass. However, his durability remains a question mark and whether he has the combination of skills to run the no huddle is something he will have to learn and show. I like us moving into the no huddle in graded amounts as quickly as it works, but I think a simpler straight-forward way for us to spread the D so Lynch (or whoever is in) can shred the spread D is for us to go with more 3 WRs as our base O. You are right that both Evans and TO credibly demand to be doubled. If one throws Parrish in as a slot WR the opponent is basically forced to use the nickle and probably the dime on each play. Lynch has demonstrated the ability to not be brought down by the first hit during his brief career. In the spread if the first hit cannot be followed up by gang tackling because the opposing dime D is already on its heels doing an over and under doubles on the wideouts and trying to defend against Parrish running a slant Lynch can go all day. The Bills should no huddle and 3 WRs because it would create great running opportunities for Lynch, et al.

How did Leodis McKelvin injure his finger so greviously it has cost him several days of PT? Operators are standing by!

Remember the Titans> Let's see. Wasn't that a film about a team that finished its season undefeated? Sure it was just high school, but any watcher of the NFL should understand that a big part of the Pats doing so well in the past decade was not a testimony to them having by far the best players at every position or even the expertise of that cheater BB, it was in part because they had team leadership which refused to lose (even when a fortunate injury to Bledsoe started them on the winning path with their young QB as the vets on the field held them together). Should one want to give all credit to Belifool then simply remember when even the lowly Bills tagged them with a blowout loss when Belifool totally mishandled the contract negotiations for Milloy, but it was the players who vocally called out the HC who held it together until BB was able to lead them to an exact reversal of the Bills tatooing at the end of the seaspm. Rather than watching too many movies faking real life I have seen a little too much real life in the NFL where on field leadership we do not have has made a difference.

Iy underscores the point that the key is not simply to assemble a bunch of elite individual players to build a team, but to assemble a balanced group of players of various skills (one effect of the salary cap is that it makes it impossible to simply buy yourself a group of elite players in each unit) who together become a TEAM. I think what folks see as a lack of elite players is actually to some extent a side effect of this team being as measured by age one of the youngest (if not the youngest though we will see with the final roster) team in the league. The big problem I see with this team is not the lack of elite players but the lack of on the field team leadership. When the tough times come as they do for every team during a season, it really is this internal leadership and the reflection of a refuse to lose attitude which makes individual players play better than they can (whether that is the good becoming great or the mediocre becoming adequate) and the TEAM ends up with a W where just a team (even if they are elite talents) gets an L.

Actually, on the contrary I think this will heighten the strategic activity as you see teams searching for a holy grail of the"new" way to do kick returns and coverage well. There is in no way one less blocker because the way these blockers can be configured has changed. There was one return guy and 10 blockers before and there will be one return guy and 10 blockers after the rule change. What has changed is that too some extent (and we will see how the rule is applied as it seems on the face of it that the critical pre-season challenge is that it will be applied differently by different teams of refs and the effort is going to be to make all application similar) teams are going to be fairly severely penalized for using a 3 man wedge when they will claim they were not doing this. The Bills actually stand to gain an advantage from this probably significant rule shift for several reasons: 1. Certainly as much as any team in the NFL they have a system for doing ST and have has success teaching this system to new players. This is important because if this rule shift suceeds and changes the game in a significant way, it will be the teams which most easily understand and successfully alter their system to maximize performance under the "new" rules which will profit the most. As long as the change is consistent (which there is little certainty it will be consistent for much of the year but we will see)the teams that run a good system well and make changes to that system to take advantage of these changes will do well. Bobby April has consistently produced good results with this team for several years. The Bills clearly have a system and clearly have made adjustments to this system on an ongoing basis to remain top level statitstical performers on ST. 2. This team has solid long term ST leadership. Bobby April clearly runs the store and has been rewarded with getting the Assistant Head Coaches job to secure his leadership amongst the co-ordinators. The "skill" players (Moorman, Lindell, McGee, Parrish) on each unit have all experienced great success for a number of years and are acknowledged leaders of their units. The skill return guys all have McKelvin behind their backs forcing competition and potentially surpassing them as they get older or unless they perform. There are a variety of vets whose primary contribution to the team is not as position players but as ST players who know their cash wealth and status on the team are dependent upon their ST play and not in becoming great position play performers. 3. The coaching staff appears committed to not simply having ST be an add-on thing to practice when they have time but devote significant time and attention to it in practice. Overall, I suspect the Bills have a "plan" in terms of how they are going to exploit the new rules. I would not be surprised if one of the reasons we have seen this team seemingly load up in drafting and acquiring DBs this off-season is not simply because we are addicted to them as position players but this may be to cover the rule change to get faster more athletic players (who are not afraid of contact) who will do well in the new world with less reliance on the wedge. The Bills will need to have more smart fast players who can learn well how refs call the game so they can be the third player who plays far enough off the two wedge players not to get called for the penalty but close enough to actually perform as a wedge for return purposes. The actually heightened level of strategy which we will see this year on ST as a team strive to have a plan to be ahead of the other teams and then strive to have their players consistently implement the plan will be one of the fun things for us football addicts to watch this year. The worse thing about it will be that the TV networks tend to mostly follow the ball and will not give us good pictures which show the entire mosaic of the coverage and return patterns as they are unleashed. My sense is that the two "issues" which April and the Bills ST braintrust will confront this year are: 1. Developing the plan for the new ST and then training the players well enough to implement the new plan consistently, but 2. I suspect the larger issue is going to be getting the refs to apply the new rules consistently . If April has a moving target of rule application to try to build and implement a consistent plan upon he will simply fail to achieve consistency.

Outside of the fact that it makes negative zero sense to make a basic change in what you are doing when you are 6-2 what you say has the relevancy it deserves.

It is my understanding based on general commentary from the coaches and also watching the signaling and activity during the game that in fact it is both the OC Schoenert and the DC Fewell who make the specific play calls during the games. However, it is also my understanding from general commentary that the entire coaching staff led by Jauron chose an overall game plan for the week based on how our team is performing and also the opponent. Thus in a particular week Jauron makes the final call but he decides with strong input from the co-ordinators whether the strategy that week is one where the Bills set a goal to be more aggressive or more conservative with the offensive game plan depending upon whether they are looking to hold the ball to keep the other offense off the field (more runs) or they decide to light it up because they see a better chance at winning by putting points on the board such that it is worth the risk that they may go three and out and place extra pressure on the D. Though the Bills almost always go fairly conservative with the O gameplan (running a lot and quick short passes rather than going for the homerun except occasionally to keep the opponent honest) the gameplan makes a difference as to whether the Bills might open with a deep pass if they feel they have a good match-up with Evans versus the opposing secondary and/or if they feel their D matches up well against the opposing O so they do not fear if we miss the first pass to Evans and face a real threat of going three and out. The gameplan also makes a difference as to whether 3rd and 2 or 3 is a running or a passing down. There is fairly constant checking in and Jauron might tell Schoenert to open it up a bit or air it out a bit if he feels the situation needs to changed. The OC and the DC are calling plays and generally it is the responsibility of the position coaches to make sure that their units are putting the proper people out on each play to run the call. The co-ordinators know generally the physical condition of each player but specifically it is the responsibility of the position coaches to make sure than any injured player on their unit is getting the proper in game medical care and to communicate to the co-ordinators if a player is out or needs a rest. He communicates this to the co-ordinators who if necessary gets word to the HC of changes in personnel availability that may effect the game. In the past, Marv as HC took over all offensive play calling in the redzone but I do not think Jauron does this. This is generally how it works from what I have seen but if anyone has any specific quotes or references that is different from this fairly standard I look forward to getting educated by these sites.

At some point, but the drawing on paper becomes one on video at some point. The key point is that there is a real world difference between static assessment of statistics and what happens on the field. The questioning of Maybin is all fan's right but based on what he has shown on the field they may just be exercising their right to be wrong.

No way Maybin is a 3 down player at R or L DE, but who cares since we run a rotation on the DL where the general standard is going to see even the best DL players play 2 of what is to be hoped is a 3 and out. Maybin is small in size on paper clearly but unless you are John Madden the game is not played on paper and Maybin has freakish speed which makes him a difficult match-up for an offense. Playing against the TE generally in college he actually had a rep for being pretty good at the point of attack when folks tried to run right at him. He does not yet show extensive pass coverage ability which is a necessity for the way the Bills traditionally play the RDE with Schobel making the Pro Bowl showing the ability to cover not only in the short zone but in the mid zone. Maybin also brings freakishly long arms to the game so if he can learn to pass cover with his hands up he will do well in the short zone. The Bills simply lacked a go-to pass rusher last year and that is Maybin's job if he can fill it. Statistically he should do it but again the game is not played on paper so show us. Without the stress of starting it looks good.

I hope you are right but past performance and logic seems to point toward this being little more than wishful thinking. TE in the modern NFL has grown into such a hybrid position where the even the simply adequate players must be able to block like an interior OL player, but also run routes and catch the ball like a WR, that it really takes an extraordinary athlete to prove to be adequate at both facets of the game. Even then if he has the talent (which Nelson appears to have and Fine MAY have) we are likely looking at them playing a couple of years of NFL ball before they are adequate at the task. It is great that Fine looks good in practice (particularly at the higher profile task of catching the ball, but face it reality demands that he also prove to be at least a talented blocker. This talent needs to be learned and demonstrated over a full season or so and is better seen if the TE can deal with complex stunts to pick up the strongside blitz rather than the less challenging straightforward though difficult to do lead blocking on a power run to the strong side. Like it or not, Fine did show some impressive pass catching ability in his less than one season, but he still is aways a way from proving he is the multi-talent we need to run a TE oriented O. Opponents are thinking about Fine only to chose which way they are going to exploit him this time rather than him playing well enough that he dictates to the D that they are thinking about him to try to figure out how to stop him. Likewise with Nelson, he is simply a rookie who I am pretty sure I can exploit with a zone blitz that confuses him as to who is coming rather than worry about him as a lead blocker. Like any rookie he has played against one player every week or two with NFL speed and know he is gonna face 11 players who are as quick as anything he has seen. What do I think the answer is to get the most productive Bills O? The answer to me if you want to win this year is to actually go with 3 WRs and a spread offense and I am looking to my TEs for ST help and to learn position play as an occasional change of pace rather than have that be our base O. I think opponents will be forced into a zone by an Evans and a TO both screaming for over and under double teams and with a 3 WR offense Parrish has greater potential if the dts give him single coverage in a spreed O. Even better, I think Lynch will do even better running against a nickel or dime in a spread defense. I hope Nelson and Fine contribute a lot as ST players because if rely on them as position players then Edwards better have a fast release because I am licking my chops to face these two youngsters if that is the best the Bills can do at TE.

I don't dismiss him at all. He should get the same chance everybody else gets to win a job on the field. The odds of what has happened in the past suggest strongly that he will not make the active roster on this team and that he is a project. He is a player who undeniably has the physical size necessary to play the game, and a lack of experience that oddly may provide him a leg up as he will be soaking up football knowledge quicker than all get out. I do not dismiss him at all. However, though the past does not determine the future and total statistical experience does not determine outcomes for one player (one need only look at Jason Peters bank account to see that) one is simply foolish to ignore the reality that Bell though a tremendous talent will be achieving a great victory if her "merely" makes the practice squad. Any declaration that he is destined to be a starter for the Bills anytime this year (and actually in the next two years) seems little more than wishful thinking. Lightening does have to strike somewhere so no one can rationally predict where it will fall. Maybe Bell makes the squad in 09, but if he does this will have little to do with his potential skills as a position player, like Jason Peters it will have a lot to do with his ST play. I actually do not doubt this young man's character (in fact as he was raised by parents gutsy enough to raise the kid overseas and do a missionary stint overseas I think the Bills can pretty clearly bank on this young man's character and that is why you put him on the PS. The Bills have shown good faith in this project by signing him to a 3 year deal. It strikes me as very good coaching and development to let this young man know he is on three year track of production for the Bills as demonstrated by this longer term contract. Some football first idiots might put this project on a two years or you are gone track (and they would be true football fools if their development goals for this project expected him to make the roster and contribute to the Bills in this season. Even though the conventional wisdom is that a 1st round draft pick should start his first year or he is a disappointment, the actual reality seems to be actually only slightly more half of even 1st round choices are starters the beginning of their second year. In this case Bell was not even a solid enough project to command a draft pick. Bill Belicheck and the entire rest of the league have already made a demonstrable decision that Bell was not even worth a lowly 7th round pick. And in light of this factual result you are worried that BB or somebody in the rest of the league is going to reverse their past actual decision and guarantee this UDFA a roster spot? Maybe with great care and development by the Bills staff AND some outstanding ST play which the unblockable Peters used to force his way onto the Bills roster may be this could happen, but you gotta admit this is a big huge IF. As far as the risk that someone like BB will snap him up. Maybe. Its possible like any of us getting toasted by a lightening strike is possible. However, as far as Bell goes it ain't even raining. BB will not sign Bell to a roster spot off the Bills PS unless Bell is a shiftless vagrant who is willing to ignore the fact that the Bills signed him to a 3 year deal instead of the standard 2. Do YOU really think Bell is shiftless enough that after the Bills showed the faith in him to put him on a 3 year plan that he would return that favor of faith by not giving the Bills a chance to match and exceed any BB offer. If he is that characterless then I wish him well and ask him not to let the door hit him on the way out. The signs point to him having higher character than to allow himself to be spirited off in the dead of season without a word and I am not worried about that because even if it was BB who stole him from us then I would say good riddance. I look forward to watching Bell develop in the next couple of years and hope like heck that the braintrust is not silly enough to even try to sell an expectation of his even making the active squad this year (much less doing the near impossible going from UDFA to starter, Sure a good person sets high and sometimes even impossible standards for his teammates. However, aspiring to make the active roster (a big maybe for a UDFA) as a rookie may be a nice thing for a motivated player to quietly shoot for himself. However, to have this as the expectation by outside parties is simply psychotic.

Yep. Like life there are risks with just about anything important one does. The question generally is one of managing those risk well to keep liabilities low and to maximize upside opportunities and minimize downside. The Jason Peters case is a good case study (apropos actually since they are both OLers) which I think indicates a lot. Peters and Bell are similar in that they both were athletes with great demographic upsides who as of yet have not made a showing against the highest quality DL opposition to make it a no-brainer to try to lock 'em up contractually. Peters had zero experience as an OL player but showed incredibly soft hands and athleticism to attract interest (it surprised many he went undrafted as a TE prospect. However, what Mouse saw in him that he was the most talented big man he ever coached drew significant interest. Peters appreciated the Bills being willing to sign him after he went UDFA. Likewise, though I am sure Bell is under no illusions that he owes loyalty to the Bills (in this man's game the fact is he does not owe the Bills a ton as yes we gave him a chance, but no we have not committed to him long term though his 3 year deal versus a 2 year deal expresses great interest. Just as Peters could have flown the coop to elsewhere if someone offered him a permanent deal while he was on our PS, other moves made far more sense when opponents came sniffing around. Put Bell on the PS, he and everyone else knows he needs a good year (or more) of pro practice to get him not to lunge too much when his blocks take him to the second level (or likely when even a second year player will try to suck him in to being too aggressive and pivot off an aggressive attack by him to rush the passer or make a tackle. From the scouting reports I read, Bell is a tall man and of course naturally plays up high and like any rookie is pretty vulnerable to being attacked by a even a young vet who has learned how to maintain a low center of gravity. He will get better over time almost certainly, but though his frame can easily take the growth which goes on being on a Pro diet with Pro weight training, as enthused as all are by Bell he is a good year of more away from being the LT we would want. Might Bell simply leave if Belicheck came to his PS door and promised him a roster spot. Sure. However, Bell would be acting like a sleazy varmint if he simply booked on thw Bills without giving them some chance to meet the BB or other team's offer. In fact, if he proved so low grade a personality that in response to the Bills giving him a 3 year rather than the standard 2 year offer, quite frankly I do not think we would want the puss bucket that did not even give us a chance to match the BB or other idiots' offer. Just as with Peters when other teams began sniffing around and offering him a roster spot instead of mere PS status if he jumped teams, Peters first move was to say thanks and he would get back to them and his second move was to call te Bills and demand a roster spot from us unless we signed him. The bottomline is that if we put Bell on the PS (which all signs point to him needing a year at least to be there because as potentially talented as he is, opposing vets would rape him if he were to start. In fact, the main reason I think BB might want to hint that he is gonna sign Bell off our PS is in an attempt to sucker the Bills into using a roster spot on a player who we would never start. I know you are hyped on Bell and I also am hyped on his potential. However, i think the best analogy for him is that of a cut-rate Ryan Denney. Denney also was an impressive specimen, but as a tall guy he was simply unplayable as a position player because he had not yet learned how to bend properly to maintain his leverage against a vet. He was simply inactive almost his entire rookie year. Bell is talented but not only suffers from the tall man's disease in terms of leverage (he can learn it in a year or less of practice against pros) but apparently when he does get put on the ground he is a little slow in recovering and getting back into the play. He has done well in his brief collegiate career because he was simply bigger and stronger than most of his good but lower than top tier collegiate opponents. However, when he comes to the NFL, like alll rookies he will find out it is a different world playing against the vets. They not only are at top tier collegiate level but they are the best of the best. You really are demanding too much of a rookie who has not played much at all, who there is consensus agreement among all the scouts (unless you did not notice no one drafted him) that he is a good year away. Put him on the PS and like Peters if someone comes sniffing around AND he is good enough at PS to command a roster spot then sign him to the active roster. If he is such a low life that he would not give the Bills a chance to match the offer then good riddance that he is gone because even Peters who proved to be someone willing to not meet his contract at least was honest enough to give the Bills right of first refusal when other team's cam knocking. In fact, the key to Peters getting a lot interest was most likely not because the rest of the NFL knew right from the start he would be a Pro Bowler (if they did and even if they thought so for Bell they would have drafted him) the key was that word got out that Peters was unblockable on ST and this is what made him worth a roster spot. Thus if you want to make the argument that the Bills are risking Bell unless they sign him to the permanent roster, this would actually only be true if there were good indicators he is a good ST player. All the arguments you make that he is a solid blocking prospects are all good reasons why you PS the guy. It would take a solid demonstration that he is an ST god to get anyone serious about giving him a roster spot this year. If folks are interested in that then actually the PS waiver is likely the bigger risk we would be taking, but as every other team in the league has already recently decided not to draft him the chances of a waiver pick up are small. The chances of someone signing him off the PS are there but likewise the Bills will get a shot at matching any offer unless Bell is a complete lowlife. With is missionary parents background my guess is that he is a solid guy and the Bills (having already graced him with a long-term contract will get that ability to match any deal.

The argument you lay put actually seems to demonstrate he would be perfect for the PS, His achievements despite not playing football at any level until recently, his not having been developed in a Pro style O, and his having played against good but not the best college opponents would all seem to argue that he be on the PS where he could spend a year getting this experience rather than throw him (and his QB to the wolves while he takes the time to become a vet, In fact, the risk a team takes when they put him on the PS is that some other team will make him an offer to go onto their active roster, Given the lackings you lay out it seems no other team would want to throw money at him and guarantee s roster spot when what he clearly seems to be lacking is experience,

Just about every good team in the NFL. The best teams are as much about depth as they are about a few (or even one in our publicity restricted little minds) stars who lead the team. Competition is good and injuries are simply a way of life in the NFL. The team is likely doing things the right way when there is for every single unit a demonstrable Pro Bowl level star leading the unit but also real competition between the last guy making the team for a particular unit and the last guy cut from that unit. In the end it is usually ST skill which will make the determination as to who is the last guy on a unit who stays and who is the last guy cut from a unit. The two problems for the Bills is that too often we have not imitated what we have right now at DB for other units and also that the few true stars were really not Pro quality players. But as far as the question of whether there are too many DBs, particularly given the import of solid ST play to this team and in the NFL it is just as legit a question to ask whether there are too few.

The last question is actually the relevant one and my choice is actually unless a rookie or unsung journeyman WR shows something great in pre-season, I keep not only the 5 WRs you mention and Hardy as well since in my world, the Bills actually go with 3 WRs as their base offense. My thought is not only does a base O with Evans and TO split wide and Parrish bringing his freakish speed and surprising toughness to the slot. but also the Bills are likely to be a better running team with a wide spread rather trying to bull through with inadequate FBs. We are inadequate not only at a blocking FB I would rely on all the time, but we are weak at having a multi talent at TE. I think this team is better using H-backs to fill the role of FB and TE when needed as the jorneymen we have called upon to focus on one aspect of play rather to be the well-rounded multiple threats we need at TE or can both block and catch the ball.

Writing him off at this point would be a truly football stupid move. Though the conventional wisdom is often wrong one pece of CW which strikes me as correct is that it is often too early to make a judgment on a player's prospects with a team until after one sees him for three seasons, Even in the what have you done for me lately world of the NFL there are simply too many folks who take the Eric Moulds career path of producing like none other than a bust his first two seasons only to have him become clearly the best athlete on the team, a perennial legit Pro Bowl threat. only to have him meltdown personally when a younger player took his traditional role as the Bills go-to receiver. The draft is pretty much a crapshoot anyway with the conventional wisdom being a first round pick should be starting by the end of his first year when the actual occurrence is its only a little better than 50/50 that it will turn out that way. Did Hardy fail to produce as a rookie and have a disappointing first year? Yep. Does his lack of first year production seriously call into question whether he was a good pick with our #2? Should we write him off? No way!!! To do this would not only be fiscally irresponsible as the significant bonus a #2 is slotted to get would all accelerate into one cap hit if we cut or traded him, but the possibility is still significant that his second year can see him develop like a player like Denney who was so easily defeated because he did not bend his knees properly at the point of attack that he was unplayable his rookie year. However, a year of learning pro technique resulted in him being a solid back-up performer for the Bills who merited the raise he got to extend his contract. Writing Hardy off would be the height of mindless panic right now. He may not make it in our now crowded WR corps but turning him into an ST hawk and having him compete with Johnson to see who is the #5 WR for the Bills (after Evans, TO, Parrish, and Reed would be a fine contribution to this team.