Hplarrm

My sense is that we are looking at spending a 4th rounder and no higher on a QB. These I think are the reasons: 1. Does anyone know of any real records of a rookie QB running a Gailey offense? In fact, offhand I can only think of Thigpen having seen enough NFL defenses and NFL speeds be able to run it in his third season. It appears to me based on what Gailey has done in the past (not a perfect predictor but a pretty good indicator that someone needs to state the reasons why they think a player is so good he will see PT under Gailey until his third year. 2. I do not see Mr. Ralph and the Bills faithful having the football intelligence to wait a couple of years for this rookie to be able to run the Gailey O without rushing him along and ruining what chances he had as they did with JPL, Todd Collins and potentially with Edwards. 3. The Bills need at least one DE (they say two), 1 OLB (probably two in my judgment) and they say they are targeting safety and CB as well. The prototype Gailey QB is actually a Fitz type (very bright with a quick read and mobile enough to survive behind our inadequate OL. They will have to forgo a bunch of immediate needs if they spend an early pick on a QB. 4. The OL is at least a player and a half away from adequacy (RT and a swing guy) and also a year of chemistry. Fitzy likely will never be a franchise quality QB, but he is a quick read, fast release and mobil enough that he survives behind an inadequate OL. Not only would an early QB pick get big money I think it is pretty doubtful he survives if we play him.

My sense is that one of the big factors in the OL improving was not simply Wrotto's improving skills but having a bright vet QB in Fitz who did a good job of reading Ds, seeing where the blitz was likely to come from and then being mobile enough to get out of the way and having a quick enough release that he got rid of it. My recollection is of Wrotto being eminently beatable as a blocker but it really was the Fitz effort that saved them from a few sacks or got a few more TDs as he was gutsy enough to hang in there and throw for the endzone when the coaches had turned Edwards into Captain Checkdown. I hope the Bills do not make a likely futile move to take Newton or Gabbert and stall improving the OL until after they pick a DE or two or an LB because the opted for a QB in the 1st round.

I disagree to the extent that if one asks whether Stroud has enough juice left in the tank to be a standout starter at DE then Stroud's play for the Bills last year says no. However, that same play indicates he does have enough left to be a solid reserve as a penetrating DT. Same player but different question so different answers.

My sense is certainly that most NFL players are steroid (or whatever illegal drug they think they can get away with)infused behemoths who really are not geniuses to say the least. However, past events with the last lockout leading to the old AFL-CIO union leadership getting tossed by the players after the owners cleaned their clocks in the last lockout, the key to this is gonna be the talented tenth of players who can play the leadership role with the lamblike players. The NFL team owners have made a bargain with the devil to forgo the major speculative cash drain that MLB and the NHL deal with when they bid for ownership of 16 year olds. They award huge contracts to youngsters and bear the costs of training them. However, in exchange for this bet they get to negotiate with kids and their parents. The NFL gets the huge subsidy of having colleges an often taxpayers pay to train these kids, but the downside is that they are negotiating with adults, some percentage of them (even if you think that players are fools) being pretty smart college educated adults. Just as Upshaw used the fact that Ed Garvey and the traditional union guys who used to be in charge got killed in the last lockout, so too is the current talented tenth of the players able to demonstrate how with a non-traditional (and actually socialistic rather than capitalistic) approach the players and the NFL actually make more money than seemed possible. I will be quite surprised if the players led by the Troy Vincent and TKO types who spent their off-seasons getting Ivy League business educations do not introduce some sort of curveball into the coming fight much the way that the threat to decertify the NFLPA in the late 80s caused the owners to go running to sign the CBA rather than compete in a more capitalist system. The players are generally stupid kids bit not all of them. The smarter ones buoyed by them proving themselves to also be stud athletes are likely to lead the brood.

Don't you think though that the fact is there is a difference between a draftee and a vet who even if he has never proved to be a legit and successful QB has been in actual NFL huddles and has had the opportunity to get NFL coaching and watch games from the sidelines rather than on TV. The Gailey MO is to take vets (and in many cases vets who sucked as QBs in previous starts) and mold these players into successful QBs in his system. This was certainly the case with the two examples you site since Stewart was obviously talented but until Gailey got a hold of this vet he put him in a system which worked for him. Thigpen also was a two year pro with the Fins (where he even got the typical failed rookie start) until Gailey rescued his career. Please educate me about them, but Gailey has no experience that I know about of him coaching up a rookie into a productive starter. Fitz more correctly fits the past Gailey actions than a Ponder does. If one wants to make the case that he will go in a completely different direction than his past success one needs to make the case besides Ponder looks good on paper to be convincing.

I disagree a bit with your take on the impact of the Combine in these areas: 1. 1. From what I have seen over the years I totally agree with you that it appears to be a rarity to have a player make a big positive move due to his Combine performance BUT a bad combine showing likely can cause a players stock and draft position to drop a lot. The whole dynamic seems to be that usually there is a bit of a friendly (and in some cases not so friendly) debate between various coaches about team needs and who to pick. If the OC is making a case to the HC about drafting so O help, and a D player shows up at the Combine having put on a bit of weight or not in good shape then the O guys will use this as a reason to badmouth the D. Players seem to rarely move up because teams have been badly burned by workout warriors. No one knows for sure as this is all about keeping secrets about team priorities for drafting and then financially when it is contract time. However, I think the default in this situation has to be that a Bad Combine performance can hurt a player big time not because it changes anyone's mind but because it plays into what various team forces who may be losing the internal debate can make use of Combine info. 2. Most players have been seen actually play by scouts and seen by all on film. Its simply logistically impossible for everyone who has a say to have seen everyone but that is why the Combine was created. Official height and weight measurements are taken (they use to rely on the schools themselves and lying has dropped a lot with official measures but surprises (both positive and negative do happen still. You are right that whole new arguments are not created by Combine results but big moves in where a player is taken do appear to happen as the arguers are reinforced or hurt big time by Combine info and seeing the draftees live by many decision makers for the first time. 3. GMs are on record saying the Combine results mean little to them. However, GMs lie! In fact I hope Nix is in fact lying to me about the team's needs because if he lies to me in order to fool our opponents I say by all means lie to me and fool us badly. 4. Many of the lists and bloggers are simply wrong. However, when it comes down to fan and local media reaction to a pick to a good degree perception is reality. If a team picks a player with lets say the #3 pick but the general consensus is that this players stock among the media and bloggers is that he played like a stiff at the Combine the team ends up getting grief for reaching with their pick. The customer is always right and if the customers are consistently being told a player is bad because of the media's lemming like views of the Combine it can make a real difference. 4. Combine perception may not be real in terms of on the field output but again perceptions make a big difference in contract negotiations. If a player is delayed in making it to camp this can be influenced significantly by Combine performance and how a player actually produces once he signs a contract and comes to camp cam make a real world difference. For these and other reasons you are wrong to claim the Combine is not meaningful.

I hope this is not the case as though I could see a way one might make this work toward what I see as the ultimate goal (winning a bunch of games each year to the point where we win enough to routinely go deep in the playoffs ane even win the SB a few times) with Cam at the helm. However, I would see the cost of this being likely two years of pretty horrible W/L results and even in that "best" case we would have to keep our fingers crossed that Newton is tough and lucky enough to survive as a young QB with an inadequate OL in front of him. If Cam were to achieve Manning's most unusual and IMHO outstanding rookie achievement achievement (he was the only QB in the entire NFL that year to start every game, that would be phenomenal) but is far beyond realistic expectations for Newton at QB. The most probable way I could see Newton being a contributor as a rookie to the Bills would be if we utilized him in a versatile manner similar to how the Jets used Smith (Newton would obviously not be used as a return guy but would exceed Smith being used as a passer in a Wildcat formation). However, the more likely highest and best use I could see the Bills actually obtain from Newton as a rookie is that the simply watches and learns as a rookie from the bench as Brady did with Bledsoe in NE until a freak injury forced Brady into play. Newton might one day turn out to be a great one, but I do not think anyone has made a credible case for him to be even likely to survive playing behind our OL which is a player and a half away from adequacy. The primary thing Fitz brings to our O which Newton cannot is vet based football intelligence and world class intellect which allows him to read and anticipate the oppomemt blitz and rush.

Thanks Astro! I really think that the Draft Tek work is great as a guide for understanding and being entertained by the draft! However, the reality of what happens with actual picks on draft day fairly quickly ends up showing that the draft and actual football in the NFL are two different things. Mel Kiper, ESPN and a plethora of blogs and magazines who make a couple of bucks off the draft have turned it into their own industry which unfortunately removes it further and further from actual NFL team building and play. For example, it is impossible in the first place to know the future in terms of really knowing who will be picked and as soon as there is one substantial surprise really one should throw out all the mocks (unless you cannot retrieve it to throw it out because it is already too wet from circling the toilet bowl) Mock drafts still have some usefulness IF they collect lots of useful data, but as predictions they become quickly worthless. Another way that the mocks are virtually totally worthless as predictive devices is that no one can predict the wild card of trades. Once one major trade occurs the predictive ability drops to near zero and individual forecasts of what a particular team may do with their mere 7 picks is also often ripped assunder. Amidst all this Kiper hair gel draft garbage though DraftTek separates itself by going in depth with a seven round guide to where to look at things once reality begins to strike the second day. Its a great tool. One just has to be careful however that when ones tool is a hammer you do not attempt to treat every screw as though it was a nail. At any rate my wild eyed guesstimate which will be rendered wrong by reality is: 1. Bills work diligently and almost desperately to trade their 1st round pick as virtually all the teams judge that this is actually a strong draft which goes very deep, but there really is no agreed franchise talent this year. Further the likely creation of a rookie salary cap when the smoke clears on the CBA negotiations (the owners really want to not speculate and give millions to Ryan Leaf types and the players like the inflated rookie salaries as it drives up all salaries but in the short term with a guaranteed NFLwide salary cap you can divert money from the rookies to a wide groups of middling vets and salaries are still driven up, We want to trade but cannot but "settle" for DE Fairly as: 1. Most have him as a difference maker as a player due to his postseason performance and the sense he generally is seen as a top 5 choice so the critics will be either satisfied or easily fended off if they whine. 2. This is a deep draft at DE generally so trading down would be great if we can do it. However, if the DE stack diminishes a chunk in the first it puts us into even stronger position to trade our #2 as second pick on the second day of the draft. Having already gotten a DE we then can trade down with the idea in mind of still getting the ILB plus another high level pick for our #2/ 3. The details after the 1st round are pretty unknowable, but I think that though the Bills are totally blowing smoke allowing and encouraging Newton speculation, that Nix's public description of needs is not farfetched, This is: 2 ILBs, 2 DEs, cornerback and safety, Though generally this is true, I think one area where thankfully he is lying to us (I am an advocate of them lying to us publicly if this is part of fooling opponents into thinking our desires are different than they areO is that it appears obvious even to this outsider that we are at least a player and a half away from OL adequacy (an RT starter and a swing man allowing us to deal with injury that almost certainly is gonna deny you an OL guy for some significant time at some point). In general my own non-professional need assessment is DE- We need 2 even in a 3-4 D. 2 LBs- The crew we ended up with simply did not cut it, Throw in the guys who ended up on the DL, even the one who have shown actual production in the past (Davis, Merriman for example are long enough in the tooth that one cannot count on them to return to their previous form) and this group is questionable at bet. I liked Pos better as an OLB when he was drafted and perhaps his use as an MLB have shown forearm injury issues and inappropriate training which make this FA someone not to count on, We need at least two players to be adequate and maybe (a BIG maybe can be developed from our current roster. I blame this position in a 3-4 for not stopping the run AND not producing enough pressure and sacks. As far as the DBs I actually like this crew playing at their best. However, with limited pass rush pressure its hard to count on this group playing their best. A QB pick is gonna be very disappointing to me as besides some theoretical field position improvement (like this is guaranteed of any rookie QB) the pick does nothing for the glaring D need. Even worse such a pick essentially commits this team to use their second choice to reinforce the OL or be comfortable with this QB safely learning the game from the bench. Blauugh if the first two picks are not D picks. 3. What I actually GUESS will happen is that the Bills snatch Fairly and still need to find a candidate for the other DE spot. They fail to find a taker for the #3 but with a night for other teams to stew on stuff and the Bills stepping up to the second pick on day 2 they actually trade the high value 2nd round pick to get 2 fairly high 2nd rounders (or the equivalent, Armed with an extra pick they can then shop for an LB, maybe the second DE. and/or a QB of folks insist as I think one of the recently praised QB stars like Mallett or Locker will fall perhaps one of these talents even falls to rd 3 or 4. It does not matter as they will mostly sit and learn the game behind Fitzy. At least that is my one and a half cents as everyone is at least a half cent short right now.

There are a couple of issues though which are independent of the CBA that impact the decision whether to tender or not to tender: 1. Folks seem to make a big thing in how they gauge FA attractiveness on the small market vs. big market thing. My sense from too many years of watching is that this distinction is really only true for a rarified number of players who are big enough names to attract huge contracts, but in the end its all about the money. For the average NFL player there really is little difference in the money to be had in Buffalo, Cincy, Memphis and many of the non-NYC towns. NFL players are gonna make a nickel whereever they go and in particular with the salary cap defining the market cost fairly evenly across the NFL (fools like Snyder being the exception that proves the rule. Peyton Manning is doing national commercials anywhere he signs and though Eli will get a few hundred K max for being in NYC rather than Jacksonville, for most players the location is merely a short term stop over and if a team chooses to be in the FA game (which Mr. Ralph has not done aggressively the location really matters in only a few cases and then its often to be in your hometown. 2. The biggest Bills FA detriment is non aggression and the second biggest is their continual losing record. 3. The tender issue may make a difference though in whether the Bills are viewed as good bosses, bad bosses, or even easy touches for money. A lot depends on what the usual action is around the NFL and it appears in growing amounts teams are routinely tendering players under 6 years as the rule allows. If Whitner feels the Bills are treating him differently than other players he will whine to his friends and the Bills will develop the rep of being a poor owner to work for and FAs may choose elsewhere when their is a toss-up offer between the Bills and others. I think the Bills ultimately may tender Whitner (unless he has no market value elsewhere which with his OK but failed played for a bad team he should find offers even if he does not deserve them(. My sense was that the Peters story actually was a lot about the Bills trying to reverse a sense developing in the NFL that they were an easy touch for more money than a player deserved after they poor scouted and overspent on Dockery and Williams. The Bills drew a line in the sand on Peters who even if you hated his guts one had to admit he was not the third best guy on an OL where even his extended RT based salary was far behind Dockery and Williams. Ironically the Bills likely probably proved Peters and his agents point as his holding out to get treated like the Bills treated Schobel (a raise while you under contract because you are clearly better than players paid more than you( actually delivered him even more scratch than he would have resigned (again) with the Bills for. My sense is you wait as long as you can with Whitner then tender him a contract which by rule cannot reduce his current pay. It is to be hoped he gets beaten out by the competition in camp and you save the base salary.

My sense is that the answer to the O vs. D question is unfortunately the wimpy truth that both are necessary and neither one is sufficient without the other. There really are two different questions here: 1. How lackluster can a D be and still the team marches to victory due to a #1 O, and alternately how pathetic can an O be and still be carried to victory by a @1 D. 2. The other question which is far more relevant to the Bills is do you build an eventual winner by drafting D first or by drafting O first (namely a franchise QB in our case right now).. Actually I think these questions are fairly easily answered intuitively. Question 1: The Bears team in '85 and the Ravens led by their D which carried Dilfer are two examples which come to mind immediately of Ds that carried Os. On both teams the Os did not compare to the Ds in ability to dominate, and both MacMahon and Difer though not career franchise guys Had very good seasons in a large part due to the short fields the Os constantly took advantage of. The Walter Payton led Bears O fits well into my necessary though not sufficient theory (I was born in Chicago and became a Bills fan after marrying a Buffalo gal and moving to the Nickel City in 1989 but rooting for the Bears in 85 I always felt they had a better chance to score when the D was on the field than the O). I think you need both but the primary example of the converse case for me is the Bills in their first SB which had a great O but a D which despite Bruuuuce and some great LBs could not stop the run and lost to DYG because the great O could not carry a troubled D. Question 2: Which first is pretty much dependent on need and availability in real life as to whether you go D or O first. In the Bills case even if you are certain that Fitzy is not the franchise QB we need you have to agree that our D is beyond bad in terms of results. We are probably two stud D players away from even adequacy. Its hard to see a logical strategy for getting a QB with the #1 that does not count on us being so bad in '11 season we are "blessed" with a top 5 pick again next year. In addition to the situation on the team biasing one toward making the 1st an attempt to get one of the two defensive studs we must have to merely be adequate, it is really questionable with Luck opting out whether there really is a franchise quality QB in this draft. Maybe Newton but there is at least a serious case one has to admit to that his playing on a running team in college is at best a recipe for him learning in '11 rather than leading the team. Even worse, probably right up there with our clear D needs and the desire for a franchise QB is that the OL appears top be a player and a half away (RT and a swing guy) and also a need to build chemistry that is gonna place the QB in real danger in '11. I think the situation the Bills are in pushes us heavily toward a D pick as a building strategy.

OJ's problem does not strike me as impaired brain function but one of impaired heart function. He showed the intellect to hire the so-called dream team to represent him, but is simply a heartless sob in killing the mother of his children.

+1 and should be plus a zillion. Folks simply need to realize that though there are significant differences between the blood mob and us fans and between the the gladiators and NFL (and even college players) that there are not only significant similarities but on the basic moral questions the similarities are in essence the same. The author Noel Coward (back in the day when a million bucks was real money) apparently in conversation to ask some dowdy socialite whether she would sleep with him for a million buck. With some verbal wheedling and proper language she admitted she would. He then asked her whether she would sleep with him for 20 dollars. She haughtily said no and asked him who did he think she was. He replied, "We have already established who you are and now we are just negotiating a price." NFL players are paid zillions rather than just given their life, but the financial difference is merely negotiation over compensation and does not determine morality.

Lets also be honest in recognizing that though it is Cam himself with O guru work which coaches the QB, his past MO is to work with a vet (often a failed vet) like Fiedler, Kordell, others to mold the QB capable of taking a team to the playoffs. Fitzy is in many ways the prototype Gailey project- 1. Has been around both watching and starting a few games 2. Did somethings well but enough of a failure in his previous play that no one else was going to lay out big bucks for him to be a starter. 2. Smart as whip according to Wonderlic and other measures. I do not know the details of Gailey's career, but if anyone knows of any specific history of Gailey recently training a rookie into a winner with his schemes I would love to be educated on this.

Rather than delaying our SB win by waiting for a rookie QB to possibly (though still quite unlikely) to develop, the better strategy would seem to be to let some other team spend the 3-4 years developing a winning QB and then run him out of town as a bust. From recent SB winner (and generally acknowledged franchise QB)Drew Brees back through HOFer Steve Young and probable HOFer Brett Favre franchise QBs are often available as FAs or cheap trade bait. If "merely" making the playoffs are your goal this opens up FA QB possibilities like Vick (for the strong of football heart), aging vet with still playoff worthy cred like McNabb, or even two time cuttee bust but still QB'ed a team to an SB win Brad Johnson. Make no mistake, its hard to pick the right QB for an SB win no matter whether you acquire then through the draft, FA, or trade. However, though some folks want to bleat that the ONLY way to get a franchise QB is through one acquisition technique (which is all the draft is as history is not only filled with franchise and SB winning QBs acquired by FA, trade, the draft, and even from his box-boy job at Walmart in the case of Kurt Warner, the key to getting your stud QB capable of QBing your team is for your squad to have a strategy and to acquire the QB you want whether by FA (in cases such as Brees) by draft )even though the RoboQB and Manning example skew drafting a 1st rounder to look better as no team had drafted a QB who led the team which drafted him in the first since Dallas chose Aikman at the end of the 80s, trading for exactly who you want rather than drafting him as in the case of Elway or Eli Manning. Knowing the Bills is simply to realize that rather than the Pitts example where RoboQB is not so much the leader of a team led by SB MVP Hines Ward or even safety Troy Polamalu or the Bronco example where John Elway despite his unparalled game ending theatrics is was reall Terrell Davis who put this team over the top. Not only with the decision by Luck to stay in school is there no QB in this draft worthy of a #3, but the Bills OL is a player and a half away from adequacy and without the vet smarts and athleticism of a Fitzy it is pretty doubtful a rookie QB even survives if he plays for this team. Drafting a franchise QB in the 1st is such a longshot that again if you are smart at recognizing talent (which all 32 teams passing on the best player in the NFL Tom Brady 5 or more times until the Pats lost the guy the work looking for when he got picked and they had to "settle" for Brady with their 6th round pick, Unless you want to advocate picking a specific player at #3 at QB the Bills should trade down at worst and pick their rookie QB later in the draft or simply forgo drafting a 1st round selected player and instead trade for a 1st round bust like a Trent Dilfer who Baltimore knew tons about what he did well and what he did poorly when they acquired him.

From all his actions it appears that Collins main motivation is getting re-elected come November. In this context his statement and firm stance is not surprising since it cannot be proven wrong prior to the election. Such expressions of confidence are good for him, cannot be proven wrong, but logically seem completely misplaced unless he is actually the person in control (which is Mr. Ralph).

Thanks to Dan Snyder's crack (or is it on crack) publicizing effort because he sued a media outlet for libel, I looked up on the internet the Washington City Paper article on Dan Snyder > http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2011/02/02/snyder-sues/ < I have given Mr. Ralph a lot of grief I am sure he pays no attention to on TSW for being an idiot. Thus article in amazing detail lays out the really bizarre price gouging of fans the Dead Skins have done while totally mismanaging the football operation. I hereby apologize to Mr. Ralph as I had concluded after his mismanagement of relationships with three straight employees as GMs (Polian, Butler, and TD), also had horrendous endings with two of his HCs (he tried to crawl out of honoring his contract with Wade but lost in arbitration and then essentially forced Mularkey out leading him to walk away from millions of dollars). He also exercised his owners right to meddle making bad football judgments only he could make that set us on a losing path of seeking the next Jim Kelly. However, Mr. Rs idiocy pales next to the recurring idiocy of Snyder. The linked article is worth a read to see how bad it can get with a bad owner.

Yesm Levy/Jauron, TD, etc are certainly accountable for their miscues and whatever folks are willing to give them credit for. However, what I think misses the mark is when some seem to want to focus on the mistakes of the folks Mr. Ralph hired and actually fail to hold the man in charge accountable/ Recognizing that Mr. Ralph and the toxic relationships he had with GMs Polian (whom he canned and then he won the SB), Butler (so bad a relationship he left the team high and dry when he skipped town), TD (Mr. R turned to him after the Butler debacle) and then Marv who was both incompetent as a GM and really the best (only one who could deal with Ralph after he burned through 3 G employees- that Marv was the only (best by default) candidate for the GM job was demonstrated by the simple fact that after Marv retired the new GM was_____ for a year. It simply makes zero sense for anyone to blame incompetent Marv for the decade plus record of failure even if one wants to whine that he destroyed the Bills for years to come. He simply cannot be blamed for 8+ years of GM failure before he took the job. I do not think this is news actually (though you sure couldn't tell this may be a novel thought to the folks who seem to want to post sharp attacks on the idiots hired by Mr. Ralph.

The big problem facing both the Deadskins and the Bills is that merely categorizing the new HCs as the longer term task of replacing an old failed regime, its that in both case the true reasons for failure are still their and the regimes have hired new HCs but both Dan Snyder and Mr. Ralph are simply failures as owners. Ironically, I think that the Skins are in worse shape with Snider simply being a legend in his own mind who has made bad decision after bad decision. Mr. Ralph also has a track record of having totally toxic relationships with 3 straight GMs and also pretty clearly seemed to mismanage his relationships with both HC Wade-O and also Mularkey. In many ways I find it wrongheaded to blame the teams HCs when it really is the team owner who the buck stops with for their repetitive losing ways. It simply makes zero sense to me that anyone can blame Jauron or even Marv for the majority of the current losing streak. Neither Jauron nor Marv did even an adequate job in their posts but the one common denominator for every year of a decade+ record of futility is Mr. Ralph. To blame TD or whomever else may be true they were failures but really misses the point in terms of asking who is really to blame.

The info and perspective you provide actually supports the point I am making IMHO. Yep, the Packer trade does represent how one hopes things work out in this crapshoot of draft choices for older players who want to go (Favre clearly was done with the Packers as they had identified Aaron Rogers as the future and in fact immediate present) and their replacement is already on the roster (which is not the case in Evans case as even if Evans is not the #1 WR any fan hoped for the Joker is great but with plays like his drop of a gimme game winner in the endzone last year he also is not the #1 and even if he was part of Evans problem has been an aging Peerless is the best we have been able to do until recently for an essential #2- Jerry Rice for example is the best WR ever bar none, but does one really want to claim that Dwight Clark was not an essential part of the 49er legacy. So too if the Bills let Evans go they virtually immediately have to find a replacement who is a proven at least #2 WR and the crapshoot of the draft is their best bet under your scenario. Could they find the WR equivalent of Clay Matthews in the draft? Maybe, but pretty doubtful if one dubs the Bills braintrust a failure at drafting such that you are willing to discard Evans who is among the best they have done in the draft recently. Again, the internal inconsistency of trading the "aging" Evans for draft pick (s) rears its ugly head. Flat out do you judge Evans production levels for the Bills as the 3rd best producer at WR of yards, catches, and TDs to be at a "pedestrian so-so level"? Has Evans been the #1 we wanted? No. Is Evans overpaid? Yep (but in the real picture all NFL players are overpaid to earn a glorious living playing a boys game and in the relative picture he got what the market required to keep him when he hit FA and any attempt to simply trade him for disappointing will not win the Bills back the bonus paid him). The bottomline IMHO is that even though the Bills would recoup his annual salary that it is simply a crapshoot where we would have to pay at least this much to maybe replace him. Sure, if someone will give us a top ten pick for Evans you take it. However, even though it worked out perfectly for the Pack with Rodgers on the roster and Matthews being acquired. The Bills do not have a Rogers level #1 WR on their roster and it seems a step back to match your step forward at best to find a #2 WR as would be essential for us to do if we trade Evans. At 29 is the "aging" Evans done? In the injury filled world of the NFL everyone can be Kevin Everett tomorrow. However, his past performance and age points to him being at least at a pedestrian so-so level for a few years to come. Maybe we could get a 3rd for Evans, but given the likelihood that this pick is more likely to be at the inadequate levels of a round choice of a Josh Reed rather than a Clay Matthews (unless you have more confidence in the Bills draft ability than I do) my sense is that trading him gives us a box of tape.

Sure trade him if someone offers you reasonable compensation, The thing which I fine fairly silly is that many posters seem to not realize that draft picks are pretty much a box of tape. There is about a only a little bit better than a 50/50 chance that even a first round pick is going to be a disappointment from the Lee Evans great on paper level to the Joey Harrington/Mike Williams true bust level. These last two are good examples as its true that even with the heavy bias toward the top 10 picks being starters at the end of their first year, the conventional wisdom despite the facts is that a first round pick should start his first year. Its a great thing when a 1st round pick like a Clements does start and contribute his rookie year, but the idea of trading Evans for a draft pick (some folks seem to feel he might only be worth a 3rd or later rounder because they are pissed at him) do not seem to understand that back in reality if you trade Evans for a draft pick unless you want to insist we would get a top 10 pick for him you more chances than not are trading him for a box of tape. Who knows maybe the late pick you get for him turns out to be Boldin or Evans running buddy for the Bills the Joker. However it does seem silly to me that the calls to trade him for even multiple draft picks because he is disappointing merely puts the decision back in the hands of Mr. Ralph who put together the same draft gurus that chose Evans. The internal inconsistencies here are that if one judges Evans to be of such value that he can command a trade for great draft picks then why trade a player of such great value. If on the other hand, the advocate judges him to be of little value, then how are we gonna get more than a box of tape for him. In addition after the Mr. Ralph employing Modrak and the crew he hired missed so badly on Evans but now are gonna hit a homerun on whatever we get for him. Trading him simply needs a lot more explanation about what one expects to happen that benefits the Bills to be a credible idea,

Yes anyone is tradeable for good compensation. The problem with the ideas being tossed out in this thread is that draft picks in general are bad compensation for a vet who has shown in the "real" world of the NFL what he can do. Is Lee Evans a stud level #1 WR? Nope. This is true for a range of reasons some of which have to do with Evans skillset as an athlete. He does not have the athleticism and desire which Eric Moulds had which made him clearly a #1 level WR and allowed him to often get the honor of winning the popularity contest known as the Pro Bowl. Do not get me wrong, Evans has a great skill set featuring near world class speed and has shown good ability to run routes and even get the ball in traffic. It is no error or mistake that he is in the top three of all time for Bills in terms of catches, yards and TDs. However, Evans, though excellent on paper simply has not been good enough to be an overwhelming weapon without a good consistent QB or without good route design by the OC maximizing basic patterns like crossing patterns and getting as close to getting a flag as possible without getting caught setting picks and doing marginally legal stuff to get separation. He is very good (and his stats no matter how much fans choose to ignore them indicate this). However, there are few signs like repetitive Pro Bowl appearances that would lead one to conclude he is as good in reality as he is on paper. Yet, what would be crazy stupid is trading him for even one high draft pick or anything folks are suggesting. Yes, good players have to come from somewhere and good players tend to get drafted. However, draft picks have a lot of value in Mel Kiper land, but in "real" life the draft is simply a crapshoot. The conventional wisdom for example is that a 1st round player should start during his 1st year or he is a bust. This just is not true. A little more than half of all 1st rounders are starters after the end of their first season, and this is actually with a heavy bias to the first ten picks who in general are the best of the crop and also go to bad teams, However, the glitz and bling and the from time to time exception like Nate Clements starts immediately. Draft picks are simply over-valued. The Bills should keep Evans unless some team foolishly offers a couple of great picks for him.

I am responding to the black and white paraphrasing that Hopeful made. I actually think that the truth is all gray area which includes the facts being the LB coached got canned but he got canned because his charges including Poz did not perform well enough.

I think not only do you have to give Holmgren (and Shanahan and even Nix for that matter) more than a couple of seasons before making any final judgments, in general HCs and to some extent GMs really get far more blame and also far more credit than they deserve for outcomes on their watch. It certainly strikes me as legit to question or praise the direction a team seems to be headed in. Thus neither Holmgren or Shanny should be immune to comment. However, any comment simply must come with not just a grain but in fact a boulder of rock salt after the first year. Overall, it is simply the case that HCs like Marv can be total losers and idiots as he was during his stint at KC but whether folks want to acknowledge it or not had a team which produced great results on his watch to the tune of 4 SB appearances. Vince Lombardi deserves to have the SB trophy named after him given the historic icon deserving job he did with the Pack. However he simply sucked as Redskins HC. Likewise Mangini proved he had the right stuff as HC in his earlier gigs but his record of failure at Cleveland (particularly given the fact last year was under new management it is simply too early to draw legit conclusions.

I disagree that what he is saying is the coaches are great and I suck. What has actually happened is a pretty good indicator that is not the situation as the Bills see it. Specifically: 1. The single major change in D improvement so far is that the team brought in Wannstedt (generally seen as having achieved his former HC status due to his D skills and failed to hold onto the HC role due to his O failings. My sense is that if Nix/Gailey see any coaching area as needing improvement it is on D so this coaches are great sentiment does not fit reality. 2. In fact, the one coaching area where they are trying to improve not only by adding more talent in Wanny but they fired the LB coach. How anyone can interpret any assessment as being a declaration of the coaching is great, particularly as far as LBs makes little sense. 3. Again, the specifics are that not only was Wanny hired for his D accomplishments but he has been given the task of LB coach as his focus. I think that Pos's comments are correct on the face of them that the Bills run D gave up a massive number of yards and simply did not tackle runners until they had made substantial gains. The questions are why did they fail to make these tackles and what will the Bills do to improve this. The clear answers that Bills are trying is that they are bringing a man with D accomplishments and directing him to give particular focus to improving LB production. Further, by firing the LB coach they are laying a lot of blame on him for not getting his players to produce better. If anything Poz is actually taking a lot of the blame for this on himself. However, the stats indicate that actually due to the large number of tackles credited to him he certainly could have tried to escape blame. Actually, given that roughly 2/3 of the tackles credited to him were solo tackles it actually indicates he is bringing down the majority of runners he gets credit for tacking on his own without a teammate joining in or piling on to get part of the tackle credit. Poz is pretty far from perfect and actually when one considers his record for significant injury there is even a legit question whether he is adequate. However, the problem is not indicated in the number of tackles he had, the % of tackles being solo, or even things like his running at the Combine which indicate speed is not his problem in terms of not satisfactory team production.

I do not think you are off base at all suggesting we do not draft a QB in the first round based on your detailed analysis, In fact, add to your analysis that a majority of the players you mention as 1-10 picks either were acquired by the teams which have them in trades or as FAs (even Peyton Manning is going to be tagged to keep him in Indy) and it is clear that a playoff making QB cannot only be picked later in the draft, but in fact these first rounders if one insists on having one are often acquired bty means other than drafting them. We should not spend not spend the #3 on a QB but instead build a winning team and pick-up our franchise QB in the wide variety of options which other teams have used to get their stud QB.