uncle flap

Agreed. I was tempted to list Chandler in that toss up section as well, since he falls into that "adequate/serviceable" category. Perhaps Moeaki or Gragg is the upgrade we'd like to see there. Although Chandler's skill set is lacking compared to the premier TEs throughout the league, I don't consider not having an elite TE as "hole" in the roster the way many here do. With respect to positions that need to be upgraded, I would list OG (x2), OT, and LB. If EJ is not the answer, then QB is obviously the #1 priority. TE and WR are on the next tier, but not nearly as important IMO. The success of TEs and WRs are directly tied to the performance of the QB and OL.

There seem to be a lot of good corners in the draft. They could probably get a starter in the second round. Not that I'm advocating that they pick a corner, but the BPA in the first 3 rounds could very well be a corner, and I'm generally a proponent of drafting BPA. To answer the OP's ? I'd agree with most here that Legursky is easily the worst starter. I don't think TJ is as bad as everyone makes him out to be but he's still pretty bad and probably shouldn't see the field unless they're going 5 wide. So If you consider the 4th string WR a starter, he'd be the next weakest. I would like to see another WR drafted or at least an FA brought in. After that it's a toss up between EJ, Bradham, Urbik, and Pears. I like EJ and hope he continues to develop but today he's a typical rookie QB prone to make mistakes and doesn't show the consistency a team needs at QB. Bradham has slowly improved over his career, IMO, but either he's got to substantially step his game up or they should explore another option. Urbik and Pears aren't exactly awful, but there is certainly plenty of room for improvement at those positions.

I don't think they will draft a QB early either. My mock is a reflection of what I want them to do. That said, I'm not exactly advocating that they take a QB, only that they stay true to their board. So, if there is a QB that they like, I'd rather they spend a pick on a QB than another position than reaching to fill a perceived need, especially if it because of loyalty to an as yet unproven commodity in EJ. Looking at a handful of big boards led me to the conclusion that there is likely going to be a QB available in round 1 or 2 that could be an upgrade over EJ, or at least an upgrade over the backups. Every other position that they "need" doesn't have a slam dunk prospect in round 1 that would make me want to forego a decent chance at a franchise QB. If EJ is a bust or even just mediocre - and by no means am I saying he is- it won't matter much that they have a blue chip TE, WR, OG, LB or whatever other player at a position deemed to lacking.

My apologies, there was a two hand girl in the Ohio State game that won.

No this from the Auburn MIzzou game. That guy actually won. The two hand girl was during the FSU Duke game. And she lost. But I bet you had a good time yesterday, so that makes you the real winner in my book.

It is true: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009091400/2009/REG1/bills@patriots As other posters have already mentioned, McKelvin caught the ball while backpedaling, so he may not have been 100% sure if he knelt it that he would be awarded a touchback or if he'd be giving NE a safety. I can give him a pass for bringing the ball out, but not for fumbling it.

If you think of it as "would I spend a first round pick on a guy who would get me 8 sacks and 2 ff as a situational pass rusher?" or "Would I take a guy who is one of the best/better LTs in the league?" or "Would I take a solid starting CB?" then maybe the list makes a little more sense. At least that's how I was looking at it.

So if the Bills had won does Russ even bring this up? Because despite all the things we are (rightfully) complaining about, they almost did. And FWIW, Toronto doesn't want the series either: http://www.torontosun.com/2013/12/04/buffalo-bills-toronto-series-simply-a-bad-idea http://www.thestar.com/sports/football/2013/12/04/nfl_picks_buffalo_bills_need_a_new_dance_partner_kelly.html Also, I mentioned this in another thread, but I find it hilarious that one of the writers is knocking the Bills for having 20k unsold for the phins game while completely ignoring that means that 50k have been sold. Which is 10k more than their pathetic turnout. If you picked the 6 lowest attended games at the Ralph over the past 6 years, you'd still put the Toronto series attendance to shame.

via rotoworld which seems reliable. I think spotrac's is messed up. Their structuring of the guarantees and incentives are off according to some other articles, but here's the reason for the varying figures: - http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2013/7/9/4506684/buffalo-bills-free-agents-2014-2015-cj-spiller-eric-wood

That's ridiculous. Toronto sold less than 40k. 20k unsold means 50k have been sold. Pick the lowest selling 6 games in Buffalo the last 6 years and they still outsell the 6 Toronto games.

EJ- " TURN UP ON THESE N----S!"

Nobody at least wants to pick mallet's brain? I'm cool with Thad, but I'd also be cool with rolling the dice on a draft pick.

Good point.

Among the many reasons the Bills *might* consider drafting a QB, the most important one is staying true to their board. If a highly touted QB falls into their lap, and they don't get an adequate trade offer for the pick, then I have no problem with them taking a QB in the first. As far as "developing" two QBs at once, they obviously can't nor shouldn't devote reps and whatnot to the draftee at EJ's expense. The beautiful thing is, if EJ doesn't pan out, or gets injured again, or mysteriously retires, or whatever... they don't have to wait until next year, nor do they have to "reach" or force a QB pick in the future, when the pool might not be as deep. For me at least, the Jets game did a lot to silence my criticisms. Right now, I'm not advocating that they should definitely draft a QB in the first anymore, but it still should be a consideration because the reasons NOT to take a QB are not as compelling as the possible benefits. All in all, what I'm really hoping for is drafting best player available. If it's not a QB, great. If it is, that's great too. I just don't want the Bills to pass on another QB they like (if that QB is the BPA) just because they view EJ as the franchise QB.

On the Bell hit: I don't know if this came into play during the review of the TD, or in the writing of the rule and the subsequent training of the refs wrt its enforcement, but I think the NFL is fine with having no "wiggle room" so that it can never come back to bite them. By that I mean that in any subsequent litigation, the NFL can claim that they are crystal clear as far as leaving no calls regarding player safety as judgment calls. "Just giving it to him," even though that would seem to reflect the spirit of the play, would signify an instance where they strayed from the letter of the law. Any instance like that could be used as "evidence" that player safety exists on a slippery slope, and that's not a perception that the NFL wants, at least as far as how its rules are enforced. Personally, I think Bell's TD should've counted, as it's not like he made a choice to continue his progress into the end zone. However, I don't think there is a way to write a rule that would allow for that and that allows for the NFL to maintain its alleged hard stance on player safety.

I think he's referring to me, and I stand by my assertions wrt the cap. We were talking about the merits of eating Fitz's cap hit all at once. If he is indeed referring to me about claiming to not have a lot of room, you are correct that it was the result of playing a variety of "What-If" games. The cap figures are freely available at a number of sites online, so there's no room to disagree on how much space is actually available, unless we are going to debate what constitutes "a little" vs "a lot."

http://www.buffalofa...lofan/HOME.html Oops I see it doesn't detail their plans on the site, but one of their main goals is setting up a trust where the fans and local businesses wouldn't outright own the team but would "loan" their money to the buyer keeping the team in Buffalo. The loan would have a zero or low interest point but assuming we/they could put a dent in the cost could go a long way as you suspect.

Hey! Someone's got their thinking cap on!

Stating that team the team is available to the highest bidder drives up the price and thus his family will be better off than if he gives someone a hometown discount. So the first question we have to ask is whether his family's financial well-being a more important legacy to leave, or does he care more about the city of Buffalo than his own family? Not that those "legacies" are necessarily mutually exclusive as far as the team staying in Buffalo is concerned, although in most cases they would seem to be at odds against each other. However, there very well may be a plan in place- Ralph says I'll sell to a particular group, as long as they are willing to pay as much as any other group is willing to pay OR at least X amount of dollars. That would certainly be a win-win scenario, and I think that has been the basics of the plan all along. The real issue is keeping the team economically viable after taking on the debt any new owner would be assuming. That debt almost certainly includes a new stadium. I do think that there are enough potential owners with enough money to keep the Bills from leaving Buffalo in the near future, but if Buffalo can't support a new stadium with more boxes and increased ticket prices, an owner won't be able to justify keeping a franchise here if he doesn't stand a chance at making his money back because the area won't support the team.

You're right that he can't stop a sale per se, although he can play a role in any renegotiations of the lease. As it stands, the lease basically prohibits a move (except for that one time opt out). By the same token, that "out" could be used to move the Bills into a new stadium, and not necessarily out of Buffalo. It's pretty brilliant, IMO. Especially considering that a new stadium will almost certainly play a big part in any future owner's plans. I think what Poloncarz is getting at is that he won't renegotiate the lease unless the buyer is intent on keeping the Bills in Buffalo. Also, in regard to another post upthread, I wouldn't count out Jeff Gundlach as a buyer. He's worth a billion himself, and manages billions for some of the richest people in the world. Between Gundlach and the others already mentioned, I think there's enough people and capital to keep the Bills viable in Buffalo, even if it means building a new stadium with cushy luxury suites for rich Torontonians.

I would much rather see the team sold to someone with local ties and is less likely to try to move the team. Whether or not the NFL wants the team in Buffalo/Toronto, I think having a locally based owner silences those rumblings. Also, I know Bon Jovi has friends, but he's got nowhere near the type of cash that some other people who have expressed interest in buying the Bills or other NFL teams have.

Not a meme, but probably belongs here today:

I don't think they should tank it, but they need to really find out what they've got with EJ. He hasn't shown enough yet IMO to discourage the FO from considering a QB in the first. If they have been "babying" him as has been suggested in other threads, take the kid gloves off and make him prove that the Bills should pass on one of the 5 or 6 prospects with a first round grade. However, without the benefit of evaluating EJ over the rest of the season, I think they should go QB in the first. Here are my more in depth thoughts on the draft and who they should target: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/163606-flaps-super-early-bills-mock/