jwhit34

I look at this season almost like a bonus year. I thought they would be better (7-8 wins) but their best days were ahead of them. None of the key components are on the downside of their careers, so their best years are still ahead of them. The only exception may be Fred Jackson. They still need to build and get more players so I say stay the course and keep building. Right now they have the so-called "value players" (Johnson, Fitz, Jackson, even Levitre and Bell) so they will have to pay them up to market value. It's then important to keep amassing value players. Guys like Kelvin Sheppard, Aaron Williams, even Dareus if he becomes elite. Don't stray from the plan because of 3-0, remember Denver started 6-0 (?) a couple of years ago and see where they are today.

I like the comparison to Jack Kemp, never thought of it but it may fit.

With all the 4 and 5 wideout sets there's no magic in being #2 (see Lee Evans, 2010). All of them will get their shot and with the talent someone (or 2) will emerge. Don't forget about Brad Smith from a WR position, and I do think Spiller gets some looks there too. With those guys they really have 8 WRs on the roster. The inactives will be a good tipoff early on, if they keep 2 inactive (Ruvell Martin and 1 other) look for a lot of Spiller and Brad Smith in wideout slots.

You can't ignore that they took Wood and Levitre in the first 2 rounds in '09. Guard is easier to fill than OT, between Urbik, Hangartner and Reinhart they'll be okay. They should target QB and OT in the first 2 rounds of the '12 draft and hopefully pick up another LB in the middle rounds.

It would be nice just once to see one of these people ho post on this site come out in advance with information concerning a trade or release of a player versus after the fact. Maybe then they would build some credibility. Short of that, it's a waste of time and I can't believe I wasted the time to read such jibberish.

The way offenses run now it is less important to say who is the #2, #3, etc. Look at the Patriots last year, they did it with two TEs. I think it boils down to what combos works the best. Right now, I would like to see a lot of 4 receiver sets include Brad Smith. Combos I like the best: Johnson, Nelson, Parrish, Smith Johnson, Nelson, Smith and either Easley or Jones Johnson, Nelson, Easley and Jones Mix in some TE stuff and there are a lot of options. I think the next one to be squeezed out could be Parrish just because of his lack of durability, though Easley has a lot to prove there too (and whether he can play in real games). I don't really like the move, a 4th rounder isn't much and I think if they kept Evans and he had some decent production they could have gotten the same thing or better in the offseason and they'd have a better idea what they had in terms of talent from the young guys.

I was at camp today and I thought he was clearly the best receiver there. It's a good, talented group but Evans is an important part. He made McGee look bad a couple of times and the younger guys were simply overmatched (yes I know it's only 1 day and camp but...). I wouldn't be surprised if Johnson's success stirs the competitive spirit in him and he has a really good bounce back year. Remember, Johnson didn't go to camp as #2 last year and he and Fitz worked together a lot. That chemistry spilled over into the regular season when Fiz became the starter. This year Fitz and Evans are taking snaps together every day, he could have a big year. I think the potential upside of him having a 70 catch, 1,100 yard 10 TD season is a better risk than getting a 3rd or 4th rounder. A couple other receiver observations: 1. Roosevelt is a darkhorse candidate to pull a David Nelson this year. He runs good routes and catches the ball well. 2. Brad Smith isn't much of a QB but he is intriguing split out wide or coming out of the backfield. Very fast... 3. TEs don't have much of a role but Chandler should do okay. 4. You have to like David Nelson, he just seems like a real professional receiver. With his size he's more durable than Roscoe Parrish and I think could be a really good 3rd WR, in the Ed McCaffrey mold (in his prime 1998-2000 pre broken leg). 5. They ran a lot of 4 wides with nice routes that we seem to see all the other teams run (quasi pick plays, the 3 bunched WRs, for example) One other note on Brad Smith: he's a good player. They have him at QB, where he really isn't good (noticeably slow reading defenses when he passes). It looks like they are coming up with plays in the base offense to run for him as opposed to running the wildcat. There were people in the stands today that thought he was running the Wildcat when he was in there but they were in their standard shotgun with 3 or 4 WRs, sometimes with 1 in backfield. I liked him split out as a receiver better than the running plays from the QB position but he's only had a few practice days. He's a nice addition.

While baseball has the Yankees and Red Sox at the top and the Royals and Nationals at the bottom, in the last 10 years there have been 14 different teams (maximum would be 20) in the World Series and 9 different winners (Red Sox won in '04 and '07). One could argue that there's more parity in baseball than football, though the recent history is a strong endorsement for what baseball has done lately in terms of revenue sharing and luxury tax.

Do you mean 2011? If so, then here's my list, keeping in mind that there's always something that happens that you don't expect: 1. Johnson 2. Evans 3. Spiller 4. Nelson I think the coaches will get more creative in how they use Spiller and they will try to get him out more in space like the Saints use Bush or the Chargers used Sproles. Also, he'll be more mentally into it and hopefully the line will be better so they can send RBs out in patterns more instead of max protection. I think Parrish will do well but I think his size has led to durability issues throughout his career and I see him missing some time again this year. Easley is tempting but he is essentially a rookie this year, I look for him to break out in 2012.

Great to see so many responses. I intentionally had left mine off when I started the topic. While a franchise QB is a must at some point, I agree winning is a habit and going 8-8 would show that this management group has made some good decisions and started to acquired the talent needed to turn this around. I vote for that. If they go 3-13 it probably will be a result of the D being awful again, the O-line not coming together and guys like Stevie Johnson regressing and Spiller being a bad pick. The franchise QB would help a lot but it would be an indication that Nix/Gailey are not the answer. Put me in the 8-8 column.

Despite getting good reviews on their draft, I have heard or read at least a couple of places (SI, Kiper) that expect the Bills to have the #1 pick next year. So, as a Bills fan, what would you rather see happen in 2011: A. The Bills show good progress and finish 8-8 or a Jauron-esque 7-9, showing solid progress on both sides of the ball. B. They go 3-13 and end up with the #1 pick in the draft. There are a couple of other interesting scenarios that could develop. A year ago, Jake Locker seemed like a lock for the #1 overall pick (and Ryan Mallett was talked about being right there with him). So now Andrew Luck loses his head coach, what if he has a down year and talk about him being a "system QB" surfaces? The other thing is that people are already talking about Luck, Matt Barkley and Landry Jones as top 10 picks. Does that bode well for the Bills? I know there's free agency and a small detail called a labor agreement to get ironed out but what should we be hoping for?

I'd be tempted to put Ben Williams on the WOF before Hansen. Of the Super Bowl era players that are not on the Wall, I'd put Bennett, Henry Jones, Will Wolford and Nate Odomes at a minimum ahead of Hansen. Odomes is #5 in career INTs and only Charlie Romes has more as a pure CB (26 vs. 25, Butch Byrd has more but he played safety most of the time).

Back in 1988 the Bills hit draft gold with Thurman Thomas in the 2nd round. Everyone in the league passed on him because of his knee. They made the pick despite having other needs and 1986 first round pick Ronnie Harmon on the roster. Could the Bills strike gold twice with the addition of damaged goods Bowers? It sure would potentially make for a great front 3 or 4, and lead to them playing more 4-3 (and thus decrease their needs at LB). Some rotation of Dareus, Bowers, K. Williams, Dwan Edwards, Carrington and Troup looks pretty good. Great teams have to take calculated risks, this may be a somewhat unique opportunity to land 2 guys that were at one point listed at the top of draft boards in the same draft. I'm sure they are poring over medical reports today. For those who can remember back that far, how many of you were scratching your head over the Thurman pick 23 years ago?

Overall not a bad list. Undervalued: Jim Ritcher: I'd put ahead of Wolford because of his longevity with the Bills. Paul Seymour: Should be at least 5 spots higher Henry Jones: I'd rank him ahead of Conlan. At worst he's the 2nd best S in team history (George Saimes) Eric Wood: It's only 2 years but based on their Bills careers should be ahead of McGahee, Harmon, Antoine Smith Mario Clark: At a minimum should be ahead of Harmon, McGahee and Burroughs, he was pretty good Ruben Brown: Has to be ahead of Conlan, Winfield and Butler, like it or not he made a lot of Pro Bowls Should go down the list: Cousineau, Patulski, Mike Williams, Cowlings, Harmon, McGahee It's tough to rate a guy high on what ifs due to injury. I loved Butler but he had a short career. It's a fun list to put together.

Going strictly by the chart, the best trade partner is the Patriots. They have #17, 28 and 33 and per the chart those picks are valued at 950 + 660 + 580 = 2,190. They also have the 28th pick in round 2 (300 points), and #s 10 and 28 in the 3rd (220 and 132, respectively). While short on points, I'd be for trading the #3 pick to them for their 2 #1s, the 28th pick in round 2 and #10 in round three. They would have the 17th, 28th, 34th, 60th, 68th and 74th picks and then 2 more in round 4 (#100 and #122). They sure could address a lot of needs. 6 picks in the top 74, they could get 3 defensive players (LBs and DL), a TE, OT and QB, then pick the best players available in rounds 4-7 (6 more picks). Then I woke up from my dream... It's a pipe dream, I can't see the Pats going for it, though you'd think that a team like that with so many picks and such a great record would be interested in trading up to get that marquee guy (AJ Green, Patrick Peterson, one of the DL) that they may view as putting them back in the Super Bowl. The big downside is that the Bills would have to face that guy twice a year. It sure would make the draft pretty fun...

The most important thing in the 3-4 is having good linebackers. Look back through the Bills teams, the original "Bermuda Triangle" in the '80s was keyed by Shane Nelson and Jim Haslett (Smerlas was good too at the NT). In the Super Bowl years, the strength of the defense was the LBs (Bennett, Talley, Conlan, then very good role players in Radecic, Maddux, Bentley, Carlton Bailey, etc.). The NT is good enough between Kyle Williams and Troup. If Carrington develops they will be okay at DE with Edwards and Carrington. Kelsay can drop down in pass situations to DE. Think about it: in the SB years, Bruce Smith was an all time great and Phil Hansen was okay (staunch Bills fans will overvalue him, kind of like Don Beebe) but otherwise it was Jeff Wright, Leon Seals, a late in the career Jim Jeffcoat, not a lot of stellar guys. The LBs carried them and if the 3-4 is going to work they need to make a huge upgrade. Von Miller, Martez Wilson and rolling the dice with Merriman has some potential. If Poz is your 3rd or 4th best starting LB that's not bad (see Carlton Bailey, Mark Maddux and Scott Radecic) but if he's #1 you have issues. Then guys like Moats, Batten and the parade of 3rd rate vets they brought in last year are excellent depth guys.

If you look at the trade value chart (link: http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php), the ideal trade candidate is the Patriots, who own the 17th, 28th and 33rd picks: Bills' 1st (#3 overall): 2,200 points Patriots picks #17: 950, #28: 660 and #33: 580 points, respectively, for a total of 2,190. Now, the chances of that happening are probably zilch, but if the Pats really wanted that impact player like Green to pair with Brady they might do it. Remember, although they traditionally trade down, they also amass picks so if they want to trade up they can. They would still have their own 2nd and two 3s. That would be fantastic for the Bills. They would have 4 picks between 17-34. Of course, Green if Green goes to the Pats and is the 2nd coming of Jerry Rice we get to see that twice a year for the next 12 years.

I'm starting to think that the Gailey era is somewhat Levy-esque. Here is why: 1. Both Gailey and Levy were veteran coaches with a lot of experience but limited success. 2. Neither was on the radar screen of fans when they were named coach. 3. While they both had limited success as head coaches, most considered them both solid "football men". 4. Both seem to have excellent organizational skills and a plan on how they want to play the game. 5. The Levy Bills were known for their resiliency and how they pulled together as a team. It's early but the 2010 Bills are starting to exhibit those types of qualities. 6. Neither has/had a big ego. 7. Levy had a 2-5 record after taking over from Hank Bullough in '86 but they were competitive. 8. The respect the players had for Levy is legendary, it seems that Gailey's has gained the respect of the current crew. Now, there are some differences, the biggest being that Gailey runs the offense whereas Levy delegated that to Marchibroda and acted more like a CEO (Gailey is more hands-on). Also, Levy had some pretty good pieces of the puzzle on the roster (Kelly, Reed, Bruce Smith, Talley, Metzelaars, Jim Ritcher, they picked up Steve Tasker and even Frank Reich) so there was more talent. I'm not saying he's there yet (nor will he be in a year) but it bears watching. Let's hope there's a lot of Levy in him.

If they ended up somewhere between #2-6 I wouldn't mind them trading down 6-10 slots and pick up an extra #2 (presumably still in the top 50). I know many may hate that because that puts the BIlls in their customary 10-15 slot, but they can either get Ryan Mallet around 15 or the best big player there (OL or DL/LB). With two 2nds they may have a QB fall (ideally like Drew Brees did in the Vick/Tomlinson year)or they emerge with an OT, DL and LB with their 3 picks. That sets them up to take the best athlete available from rounds 3-7. Who knows, with a couple of free agents, development of the young guys like Troup and Carrington and 3 decent picks in the top 50 maybe they become respectable. Even though they're 1-8 they look like a professional team, they don't squander timeouts, they look like they know what they're doing in the 2 minute drill, etc. I'm not talking playoffs here but quantum leap improvement.

Ideally, the Bills will use a 2nd or 3rd round pick next year for an OT (presuming that the #1 pick is a QB). The information about position moves of the younger guys leads me to think that short of adding a player, the plan for the line with the existing personnel could be: LT: Cordaro Howard LG: Kraig Urbik C: Eric Wood RG: Ed Wang RT: Andy Levitre The only one that doesn't seem to fit the physical specs is Levitre, and some would argue he is the best lineman they have right now. Hopefully they add a true tackle in the draft and it's a good player (remember if they draft #1 or #2 they get the 33rd or 34th pick in round 2). If they did that, put Levitre back to LG and Urbik at RG and Wang is a depth player.

Conventional wisdom is that if the Bills are going to trade a RB it will be Marshawn Lynch, and that his playing time the last two weeks is to showcase him. If (and it's a big if) he has cleaned up his off the field behavior, the better move may be to trade Fred Jackson. I love the Fred Jackson story, but setting aside the feel-good aspect of him, he's 5 years older than Lynch (29 to 24). There really isn't a discernable difference between them other than Jackson was decent at returning kickoffs last year and they clearly don't have any need for him to do that in 2010. Because he's a good citizen, he may even return more in a trade than Lynch. Gailey likes punishing backs (see Jerome Bettis) so Lynch probably fits the Gailey RB mold pretty well. If the team is building for the future, a return to '07 and '08 form for Lynch would work. He's signed through 2012 I believe so that works too. As much as we probably would prefer the great story and good guy to stay here, it probably makes more sense to trade Jackson than Lynch.

Spiller, Evans and Byrd are very logical names to bring up. However, the league doesn't place a premium value on RBs though a proven difference maker could bring more. The same can be said for WRs. They never seem to bring high value back in a trade. I'm surprised no one mentioned Eric Wood. After QB, linemen tend to be essential building blocks for good teams. Coming off injury could dampen his value but by the end of the year I would bet that he would have the highest trade value.

Hopefully a good backup this year, best (okay overly optimistic) scenario he's a player, move him into LG and move Levitre to RT. Of course, let's play the 2010 season first. Maybe there's a little depth at least this year. Pittsburgh has a pretty deep OL - also cut their starting C from last year to make room for 1st rounder Pouncey.

These comments are right on. The talk about Brown was a classic case of locals overvaluing the guy when he wasn't that good (I call it the Don Beebe theory - back in the day there were those who talked about Don Beebe like he was on the verge of being a Pro Bowler when really he was just a good 3rd receiver). Also, this may be a good indication that they are thinking QB for the 2011 draft. If that is the case, they don't need Brown. They would probably keep 2 of the 3 current QBs and add the new guy into the mix.

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but I would think there's an expectation to have an informed opinion and that people wouldn't just be flat out nasty. I think just about all of us would be very surprised if the team was a playoff contender. However, this group, including the coaches and front office, deserves a chance. Training camp and preseason was much better than in past years. There's still holes on the roster and they need more good players but it appears that they are starting to add some good players. They may have added some good players from the draft. The front office may have found some diamonds in the rough in David Nelson, Donald Jones and Antonio Coleman. Are they making the all rookie team? No, but at least they have some talent and let's face it, if they can find 1-2 UFAs per year that can contribute and eventually be starters, that's a winning formula (theproverbial "value picks"). The coaching staff seems to know what they are doing. They ran a rigorous camp, the team, while still lacking at some positions, looks like an NFL team and seems prepared. One of the things that I thought was most encouraging was howw they ran the 2 minute drill vs. the Colts. Admit it: how many times in the Jauron and Mularkey eras were you either yelling at the TV or in the stadium for them to hurry up to get to the line or judiciously use a timeout? I know it's only the preseason, but they were crisp, moved quickly and with purpose, and made good use of the clock. That's a great sign of discipline. I'm no pollyanna, I know the season is going to be rough, but Rome wasn't built in a day. Given that they kept 22 players on offense and 28 on defense the team is admitting that their talent on offense wasn't NFL caliber. I expect them to pick up at least 2 players off waivers and a LB and a DB will be cut. I would also expect them to only name 5 or 6 to the practice squad. If they do pick up a couple players and cut two I bet they cut 2 that are PS eligible, it will be easier to get them through after other teams have their roster set. That's being pretty smart. I have two kids, ages 8 and 6 and they're both Bills fans already. My 8 year old has gone to games with me the last two seasons and my 6 year old is going for the first time to the Miami game (thankfully, not too many crazies around my seats). We go to training camp every year (my daughter has gone for 5 years). The team has been bad their whole lives but it is so neat to see their innocent optimism. The morning after the Colts preseason game, my daughter woke up and the first thing she asked was "how did the Bills do?" When I told her they won, she said, "maybe they're going to be pretty good this year (she knows the Colts played in the Super Bowl last year)." Their innocent optimism has frankly helped me hang in there with the team and in some respects re-invigorated me in following the team. It has made me think about the years going to the games with my dad and watching some bad Bills teams but also the thrills watching OJ and the team getting better for a brief while. Opinionated is nice, well thought out and informed opinions are great and what we should be shooting for. It's a new season, everyone is 0-0 and let the games begin.