hondo in seattle

The franchise tag is expected, but welcome, news. The Bills already lost McGee, Kelsay, Wilson and Barnett. Whatever we thought of these guys, they played a lot of snaps because they were better than the next guy down the depth chart. I like Pettine as DC but I don't know he has enough to work with. It would have sucked to lose both our starting safeties and 3 of 4 of our starting defensive backfield.

So let me try to understand... You actually think a Bills coach who does this work professionally and full-time knows more about NFL personnel than we TBD posters? Hmm. That's a difficult concept for me to digest.

When did the Bills ever announce that they were turning the keys over to Whaley after the draft??? This has been assumed by some. It may have even been hinted at. But it has never been stated officially and definitively. In fact, Nix says he's staying around for a while yet more. I'm glad Whaley isn't getting so impatient that he's looking at other opportunities.

I haven't live in Buffalo since 1977 when I went away for school so I haven't seen a lot of Bills games in person. But I was at Joe Robbie Stadium for this one. Never imagined I'd have to wait 20 years - and counting - to witness another playoff win.

I was taught in the army, "The leader is in the critical place at the critical time." I'd be nervous if he wasn't down there. He's not a talent evaluator but he is the President & CEO.

+1 There aren't a lot of great alternatives. I think we have to keep him. We can't put all our eggs in the TJax basket.

Different teams value different QB characteristics (ability to get the ball out quickly, leadership ability, ability to throw deep, mobility, etc.) differently. Where a team puts a guy on their draft board depends on how they value these different characteristics. I agree with many others that no where does Whaley say the Bills will compromise. He's just saying the value of a QB depends on the value you assign each trait.

I think we'll be a little below .500 in 2013 as we've been for the past several years. I think Gailey was an average-to-good OC. I think the Marrone/Hackett combination will be better but not necessarily right away. It sometimes takes a while to install a new offensive (or defensive) scheme. Furthermore, until the quarterbacking gets better, the offense won't get much more productive. And if Levitre walks, our OL will suffer. All in all, our offense may take a small backwards. On defense, I think we all expect Pettine to be a better DC than Wanny. But we just cut 3 starters and may yet lose another. While they all had problems, their back-ups aren't any better. Nonetheless, I do see the defense improving somewhat in 2013 thanks to Pettine's philosophy, preparation and more aggressive approach. Of course, free agency and the draft could change these assessments, especially on defense. However, I'm not at all confident we'll find that franchise QB we've all been waiting for. If Fitz isn't the QB in '13, it will be either TJax or some raw rookie. I don't know if I'd call 2013 a "waste" because Marrone/Hackett/Pettine will be laying the foundation for the future, but I don't think we'll be in playoff contention.

+1 Teams get most their player analyses from their scouts. They don't care much who's getting hyped by Kiper on ESPN. If thought Kipe was a good talent evaluator, they would hire him. They trust their own scouts more. Sherman is just bitter that he got drafted in the 5th round.

I get this line of thought but just can't agree. I want to avoid the scenario where the QB we draft in the 7th round is our starter even though he sucks because we just don't have anyone else. Anyone my age (54) or older has recollections of QBs far worse than Fitz behind center. Fitz was painful enough to watch. I don't want even greater pain in 2013. I'm okay with cutting Fitz - but only once we find his replacement.

So, Doc, how has the game passed him by? Can you evaluate talent better than Brandt? Show us. Although he doesn't work for the Cowboys anymore, Brandt still scouts college ball every year, using his connections in the NFL and NCAA to give him insights that we readers may lack. I for one appreciate someone who actually knows the game from the inside - unlike many other journalists. His sabre-metrics type approach has some surprises. Some people have suggested we take Glennon with #8 and Brandt's analysis is cautionary.

+1. Chan failed as a Head Coach but I don't know how much the QB is his fault. Of course publicly he supported Fitz. Most coaches will do that to boost the player's confidence. It's simple psychology (Google: "Pygmalion Effect"). We just don't how Chan privately evaluated Fitz nor how much he may have (or may not have) lobbied for someone better like Kaep. Comments to the effect that Gailey was an "offensive moron" are silly. I guess people talk like that because it makes them feel strong or smart. But when you look at Gailey's career, his offenses were often in the top ten. Even his performance with the Bills offense wasn't terrible given that he was working with a subpar QB and receiving corps. If Nix had drafted Kaep and Wanny ran a better defense, Chan might still have a job.

FWIW, in the 2010 book, "Blood, Sweat and Chalk," Chan was quoted thus... "The single wing stuff is going to become the norm in the future. Over the next 10 or 15 years it's going to evolve because the runner-thrower is the kind of quarterback that the college game is producing. You won't find a ton of the six-three, six-four, drop-back passer. They're not in college, so we're not getting them up here... Pretty soon somebody is going to find an athlete who can run and throw and just take the conventional quarterback off the field." The 49ers are not a single wing offense but Kaep is the type of running-throwing QB Chan sees becoming more prevalent in the future.

This isn't my ideal solution but... Bill Walsh created the West Coast offense while the OC at Cinci as a way to compensate for Virgil Carter's weak arm. Could Marrone do something similar with Fitz?

I know I'll get hammered for saying this but: DJ was not a horrible coach. As I recall we led the league in injuries twice when he was here. When you have few good players to begin with, and then your best players are injured, you just aren't going to win many games. The day Mike Mularkey chased Rusty out of Buffalo was one of the worst in post-Kelly Bills history.

Like most here, I don't want to see Fitz suit up as our starting QB ever again. But I don't want to see him cut either - at least not yet. I find the idea of having ZERO QBs on the roster frightening. Any QB we draft may turn out to be worse than Fitz and there aren't any impressive FA QBs available. I mean, this is the friggin' NFL - you can't go into the draft without a single QB under contract. Even if we do draft a good QB, he would benefit from a smart mentor. It seems to me, under the circumstances, restructuring Fitz (if true) would be the best option. Hopefully they restructure would allow us to cut him later without a huge cap hit.

Scary thought.

According to his bio, Russ Lande (the author of the article) used to be scout for the Rams and Browns. Surprisingly, there's not another QB on his list of top prospects until Tyler Wilson at #33.

We all agree that running around the block and playing b-ball are better than doing nothing. But Stevie himself says that if he worked out harder (i.e. followed the instructions in his off-season workout booklet) he could maybe accumulate 200-300 yards more. I'm not arguing the figure he presented is accurate - only that he knows his effort is far from total. So we have a situation where Ralph is paying Stevie 100% of the promised salary. But Stevie is only giving 80% effort in the off-season. Worse, Stevie isn't doing his best to help his teammates win. I never played NFL ball but I did lead soldiers into combat. If I found out one of my men didn't do his best to prepare, I'd be freaking pissed that he didn't love and respect his fellow soldiers enough to do the right thing to help them survive and accomplish the mission. Obviously, the stakes are a little lower here. Football is not a game of life or death. But, still, if you care about your teammates, your going to do your utmost to help them win. Stevie is no Randy Moss on game day but his lack of commitment during the off-season is a disappointment. I liked Stevie before. I like him a little less now.

Count me amongst those disappointed in Stevie. Every player has an obligation to his teammates and coaches (not to mention the fans) to be his best. By his own admission, he didn't do his best. I think he's letting down his teammates. Using his own numbers, he might have gained 200 or 300 more yards if he had worked out in the off-season. How many more TDs would that have been? How many more drive sustaining 1st downs? How many more wins?

I was at that game with my toddler daughter. She's a journalist now and, sadly, a Raider fan. The game wasn't as close as the score.

Good research! But I'll nitpick. The NFL didn't form until 1920. So any football club before that was not an NFL team. If you look at the standings, the Buffalo clubs were good back then. http://www.nfl.com/history/standings/1921 I can't recall what year, but I remember once reading that the Buffalo franchise was cheated out of the NFL Championship because some other club counted non-league games in their record. Back then there were football clubs outside the NFL that weren't that bad. The NFL didn't have a monopoly on the best players or teams. The league champion was the club with the best record - though most believed only league games counted and everything was exhibition. Buffalo had the best record against other NFL teams but the championship was awarded to another club.

Have you guys seen the fan map posted on another thread? http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18d0rfk0hn1lppng/original.png Most clubs have large regional fan bases. Buffalo's, fan base on the other hand, is geographically one of the smallest - including only Buffalo and outlying areas. And the Buffalo itself isn't very populous. We really need Southern Ontario.

+1

Neither was very good actually. The D was good back then.