uncle flap

I could see this happening: Bills trade Byrd and their 3rd round pick (#73 overall) to Cleveland for Cleveland's 2 3rd round picks (#71 and #83 overall) I'd prefer to keep Byrd if they can agree to a long term contract, but I think a trade like this would help the Bills more in the long run than tagging Byrd and letting him walk after this year.

Agree with acquiring better players. Disagree with getting rid of two of the better players. It sounds like you're trying to add 9 starters. How do you want the Bills to upgrade the D? Through the draft? Through Free Agency? Who do you think would be a good fit? Who do you want to start in place of Byrd if he's traded? Is that player on the roster? Who do you want to line up at WR now that you traded Stevie? How will you acquire that player? If you maybe upgrade TE, how would you do that?

How do you mean? Bridgewater, Manziel, and/or Bortles (who I think are likely to go in the top 8) are ranked lower than other QBs in the Bills eyes? Or just that their top 15 doesn't include any QBs period?

I don't know that you can make that assumption. Of course it has a good chance of ringing true in a matter of speaking, but the QBs could be ranked far differently by the other teams than they are by the Bills. For example, Manziel might be the "consensus" 2nd ranked QB after Bridgewater. But what if he's number 1 on the Bills board, and not other teams' boards altogether, or at least not with a top 8 pick grade? In that example, say Bridgewater goes sometime in the first 8 picks. None of the other teams happen to like Manziel enough to take him that high. Then the Bills select him at 9, getting the guy that they'd take if they had the #1 overall pick anyway. Is that then a bad pick because the Bills didn't agree with everyone else? Or another way to put it, even if 3 QBs are drafted before the Bills pick, but the guy they had ranked as #1 anyway is picked at #9, does that necessarily mean he's the fourth best prospect? Sure, it's not likely, but it's certainly possible that the Bills would get the 1st or 2nd best prospect, at least in their eyes, no matter how many QBs are selected in the first 8 picks.

Nice post, Mr. Rebel!

See: 1.) EJ Manuel and 2.) Cordy Glenn

LOL I did in my first post and then decided to leave it out

See my post above. I'm totally with you wrt philosophy... I just don't think Ebron is a good fit, so I would've used another example. Another way to put it ( as I have in other threads) is I think the drop off in talent of some positions is far more drastic than in others- and that is especially true in this draft. Couple that with the idea that (IMO) the difference between a standout G or RT and a decent G or RT is far less important to a team than nearly every other position.

Despite the need for upgrading at G and T, I still wouldn't call it "dire." There are starting caliber Gs and Ts strewn about the draft. They should feel comfortable picking them in either in rounds 2 and 3. Even with no draft, it shouldn't be hard to get serviceable players at those positions in FA. Especially when IMO, they don't need to spend money elsewhere. Now, TE could use an upgrade, but even if they let Chandler go and don't sign anyone else, they still have Moeaki, Gragg, and Smith. Not great but they can make do. To those clamoring for Ebron at #9, the dude can't block. They're better suited waiting until the middle rounds to get a better all-around TE. For LB, I think we'd like to see better play out of Bradham, but I feel like he generally improved as the year wore on. If they don't upgrade there, it's not the end of the world. The big runs that we remember were more a product of schematic flaws and (kiddies, cover your ears) our golden boy Kiko over-pursuing. Sure I'd like to see better run defense, but I think our overall perception is skewed by a number of bigs runs at inopportune times. What I'm saying is maybe we could do better than Bradham but he's a second year player that IMO has gotten better as his career has gone on, and not the black hole that some make him out to be. I feel the same wrt the WRs. They're young and getting better. We don't know their ceiling. TJ Graham might not pan out but if he winds up as the #4 WR, he's about on par with a lot of #4 WRs around the league. The Bills run with the 11 personnel (1 RB 3 WRs and 1 TE on the line) most of the time. Graham shouldn't see the field all that often anyway, so regardless if you think he sucks, he shouldn't be used as an argument that the WR corps sucks. Re-signing Byrd should be a priority, but if they lose him, I don't think the combo of AW, Searcy, Meeks and Duke is going to cost them any Ws. Now if Duke/Meeks doesn't pan out they can make S a priority again next year. All that said- At #9 I'd take BPA out of WR LB DE S (depending on Byrd's status) or QB. Maybe even CB, but I don't think there's one that would be BPA at #9. But not T or G or TE. Pick up a T or G in FA. Draft a TE or T/G (whichever they didn't get in FA) in Rd 2 and get the other in Rd 3 (TE or T/G).

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000326854/article/doug-marrone-buffalo-bills-can-go-any-direction-at-qb

Yeah, looking around now, it appears the average amount of fees for most of Doubleline's various funds is around 1%, (although some have up to 4% in load fees alone). My "conservative" estimate probably wasn't all that conservative wrt how much he has "probably" made from Doubleline. However, based on my assumption that in 2011 he was worth more than $90 million - he earned his first $1 million check from TCW in 1990 and was making $40 mil/year by 2009, so I think we can assume he'd have far more than $90 mil to his name at that point- and that besides whatever he's made from Doublineline fees, he likely has made money on his own investments, I still think he's gotta have a billion by now. I had a feeling about the Forbes lists that you seem to confirm - many of the profiles seem to have fuzzy estimates so it's not as if they are looking at private tax returns or anything like that. I admit I'm just smitten about a guy with a ton of money who said: and http://blogs.wsj.com/dailyfix/2011/05/26/bills-draw-another-interested-buyer/ http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/05/gundlach-bills-buffalo-nfl-doubleline-tcw-bond-funds.html PS Sorry everyone, not trying to hijack the thread

Well, IIRC there were audible laughs when Gundlach proclaimed to only be worth $90 mil. But if we believe him, then add the $66.7 million, call it $150 million. Is 2% a reasonable estimate as far as investment/administrative fees? He's getting the lion's share of that, so I would guess he personally made around half a billion from 2009-2012. So, now let's say he's got $600 million as of 2012. Since then, Doubeline has grown by almost 70%. He's likely more than doubled his personal net worth in that time (on fees alone, not including any of his personal investments), which is why I think it's fair to assume he's easily a billionaire. Now, consider that Gundlach claimed that TCW charged up to 5% in management fees to his clients because high rollers were willing to spend that much on Gundlach and Co.'s genius advice. (To be fair, TCW denied this.) So, I don't think it's a stretch to think that Gundlach could have been making significantly more than what I projected above, as it's certainly plausible that some of Gundlach's accounts are paying a premium higher than the 2% I used above. I think if you look at a conservative estimate like mine, it's pretty plain to see he's more than likely worth well over a billion. While I can't "prove" it, I don't have much reason to doubt it, and in fact I think he could have substantially more. However, he isn't on any of those Forbes billionaire lists, so perhaps his net worth isn't what it appears to be. In any event, he definitely has a lot of dough and wants to keep the Bills in Buffalo. Between him and some other of the names that have been bandied about, I'm gonna hang on to hope that the Bills aren't going anywhere for a long time.

Unless he gets hurt again. Then what?

That pft article is somewhat of a stretch. While it may be true that the forming of the committee is a CYA move, one third of the committee is appointed by the Bills, and the formation of the committee was negotiated by the county, the state, and the Bills as a part of the lease. So, 1. Once the Bills appoint their committee members, there will be more talk of refurbishing the stadium and/or projects that the Bills themselves would support, and 2. Florio and others are forgetting that as a practical matter, it is in poor taste for the Bills to comment publicly on Mr. Wilson's demise and the subsequent sale of team except when absolutely necessary. Behind the scenes, the Bills may be more willing to explore the prospect of moving to a new stadium in the area, however publicly discussing prospective future sites undermines the fact that the Bills have already used hundreds of millions of dollars on the Ralph. When trying to get people to buy tickets in 2014, they certainly don't want to allude to their stadium being a dump without a concrete plan for a new stadium on the horizon.

Weird because looking at the writer comments, there are much better cases presented for a number of other teams, but their chances of drafting are "Medium."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/16/bills-stadium-committee-could-be-advance-political-cover/

Right, my mistake. So it seems they'd save $15-18 million in real money but still have approximately $17 mil in dead money over the next three years?

I didn't consider that, but when is trading allowed? After the Super Bowl or not until the new league year? The new league year starts March 11. Not sure when Stevie's bonus is due. Googling says "March," so idk if that means March 1 or March 11 or just sometime in March. Either way, I don't think it's absurd to think a team could negotiate and agree to a trade at anytime, and then execute the trade during the appropriate window. For the record, I think this is much ado about nothing. I like to play the "What If" game, and re-reading some of my posts it seems like I'm a conspiracy theorist. I think it'd be foolish to part ways with Stevie unless another team were to make an offer the Bills couldn't refuse. But I can't see that happening, so here's to hoping even if SJ is in Marrone's doghouse that Whaley wouldn't do something so stupid.

Sure. I mean, I don't think it's likely that he'd be cut. And if he was traded, you'd think he have something positive to say about where he's going and "handling biz and having fun," and all that. That said, his twitter and instagram feeds have been topical- like a reflection of current events, not throwbacks to training camp or the 2012 season. So while his pics may be unrelated to being released or traded, they aren't what you typically find on his feeds. Then again, he's due a $1.75 million roster bonus in March so who the hell knows?

He's also due a roster bonus in March, and that's real cash.

The day before he tweeted this "Thank You Fans!" photo, so maybe there is something afoot. http://instagram.com/p/kdOoCUzNAE/

Hmm maybe the haters are getting their wish

If you're referring to TCW, I believe that has all been settled. I'm not aware of any other legal issues. As far as being worth enough, he's worth at least a billion. Buying the Bills would probably be financed through borrowed money anyway (Doubleline alone manages about $50 billion). He just as likely could be a part of a group of buyers, so I wouldn't disqualify him on those grounds either. The real issue isn't affording the Bills purchase price, it's the willingness to assume that debt while struggling to turn a profit in a small market. In other words, I don't think potential buyers are hemming and hawing about if they can buy the Bills, but if it is worth it to do so. Add a new stadium, and by my estimations it would take like 15 years just to break even. Yeah I guess that's not too bold, especially considering their areas of "need." The drop off in safety talent is much more steep from the first to the subsequent rounds compared to TE, OL, LB, and WR, I suspect.

Bold draft prediction: Calvin Pryor at #9 http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=9845696

And it'll be led by this guy