gumby

Walterfootball.com is as lame as any other mock draft sight. They know little about the teams they're writing about. Most guys on this board could make as decent if not better mock draft than the so called "experts". In round 3 he has us picking Titus Young out of Boise St. to be a deep threat for Pryor. Because Lee Evans is due 8.4 million next year. The guy likes to take a shot at the Bills every chance he gets. And while the Bills do deserve criticism he uses it to be snarky instead of insightful.

I played around with this a little bit. In one sim it had the Bills taking Mike Hartline QB out of Kentucky in the 6th round. Interesting thing was Blaine Gabbert went undrafted. It's a fun sim to play with but I wouldn't take it too seriously.

You change a culture of losing by getting better players. Not by winning a meaningless game in week 17.

This I agree with 100%

You like stats so much and then you go on to say the Pats are the best team in the NFL. Yet their defense is ranked 27th in the league which by the way is lower than the Bills. Furthermore they hammer the Bills 34-3. The Pats are the best team in the league because they have the best QB in the league. Period. End of discussion. The rest of that team is interchangeable and isn't much better than the Bills. The NFL is a QB driven league, with a great QB your chances of winning are increased exponentially. Would I take a rookie QB? Absolutely! Am I afraid he might not develop? No! How is drafting an o-linemen or defensive front 7 any safer?. For every Leaf, Couch, Carr, Russell that others throw out on this message board, one can list Mandarich, Gallery, Williams, Bosworth. All positions have their busts. I for one won't curl up in a fetal position with worry because we "might" draft a bust at QB. A rookie QB might take a few years to develop. But at least we would be heading in the right direction. With Fitzpatrick you're just spinning your wheels and putting off the day when the position needs to be addressed. I guess we should agree to disagree. You see Fitzpatrick and see potential. All I see is mediocrity.

I don't agree with the premise. Ralph spends plenty. The problem is the guys he's put in place spend the money on the wrong players. Dockery and a pair of lousy ex-Raiders linemen come immediately to mind.

I don't care about Cassell or Hasselbeck and don't consider them great. Plus if you're comparing Fitz to a broken down Favre well that says it all there. I once heard a saying that went like this "Stats are for losers" Rothlisberger and Favre may not have great numbers but they win games. There are many instances where you can point to where one of those guys rallied his team down the stretch to win a game. That to me is the essence of a great QB. When the chips are down can you rally the team to victory. 2 years ago Big Ben had a season of those that led to a Super Bowl win. Favre has a career of them. Where's Fitzpatrick's moment, in a big game that meant something. All the Bills were saying all week was the Pats game was a "gauge game" to see how far along they've come. And Fitzpatrick proceeds to produce his worse game of the season. Sorry I'm sure he's a nice guy, Harvard educated, and has a truly awesome beard. But I want the team I root for to be great not just "good enough" and hope we can sneak into the playoffs as a wild card team.

Until the Bills get a legitimate QB they will never compete consistently. Fitzpatrick is what he is an above average back-up QB.

You're not getting a second round pick for Evans. He's not even a #1 on the Bills and hasn't been the last couple of seasons. There's more value in holding onto him than moving him.

Fitz is a nice story this year. But reading every post in this thread even his supporters are saying if he gets the right kind of help we can be a wild card team. Really? Have we sunk that low that we hope to one day squeak into the playoffs? I still hope for greatness. To be great a team needs a great quarterback. Fitz is decent. I fully expect him to be the QB in 2011. But anyone thinking he's the long term answer is nuts.

I agree with everyone who said "Christmas Shoes", "Last Christmas", and "Wonderful Christmas" as being very repulsive. I also find Neil Diamond's "A Cherry Cherry Christmas" to be pretty bad too.

I want them to try as hard as possible. Give the 'ol proverbial 110%. Then at the end of the day come up short. I don't play to "win the game." Because I'm not on the team and I doubt anyone else on this board is either. This team has won two meaningless games. I don't believe that having won them has helped in any way to instill a winning culture. All it has done is put the team in jeopardy of missing out on drafting probably the highest ranked franchise quarterback coming out of college in over a decade. I have been a fan of the Bills long before this current crop of players arrived and I will be a fan long after they're gone. I want to see my team be relevant in the league again. I want the Bills to be great again. I'm tired of hearing that a back-up quarterback is good enough. That a bunch of guys who "try hard" is something to root for. Have we as fans been so beaten down by the last 11 years that greatness isn't even considered anymore? That the best that can be hoped for is to reach the level of mediocre? Not me brother, I'm tired of my team being the NFL's version of the Island of Misfit Toys.

I read this as being the sarcastic rant I believe it was intended to be.

Auburn runs the ball over 77% of the time. Newton's got just as many running attempts as passing. Call me crazy but if we draft a QB shouldn't his strength be in actually throwing the ball?

I could not disagree more. Brady and Fitz are barely in the same league. The QB makes the line, the line doesn't make the QB. Brady's been sacked one more time than Fitz while playing 2 more games than him so that's pretty comparable. The Pats defense is ranked 2nd worse in the league. I don't think the Pats skilled players are that much superior to the Bills. And yet the Pats are 10-2 and the Bills are 2-10. Why? Simply put the Pats have a franchise QB and the Bills don't. Period.

As long as the Pats have Brady and the Bills roll out a back-up QB you will NEVER see the Bills compete with New England. In the NFL it all comes down to who has the franchise QB. Until the Bills get one, whether that be Luck or someone else, they won't be able to compete consistently enough to matter.

Quite possibly the single greatest post in this or any other universe.

It's Luck and everyone else is a distant second.

Interesting list. What I find most interesting is of the 3 reasons why you list 5 but not one of them mentions the most important...talent.

Actually Walsh didn't coach any of them. My point is that it's stupid to throw out a school just because somebody else was a bust from there.

Worked out good for Oakland too. Only Notre Dame QB alums have won more Super Bowls with 5. Stanford is tied with Alabama, Purdue and LaTech with 4. So based solely on Super Bowl success you'll be hard pressed to do better than Stanford.

I guess I'll be the contrarian. Kyle Williams is an undersized nose tackle. He plays with plenty of heart and will occasionally come up with a good play but he gets pushed around far too often. A NT should tie up at least 2 o-line men to allow the LBs to make plays. He rarely does that. Being last in the league in rush defense (by quite a bit) and another 274 rushing yards against tells the story. I view him the same way I do Fitzpatrick, a player who is best suited as a valuable back-up.

If Whitner makes the Probowl it should be immediately canceled because it will prove once and for all that's it's a complete and utter farce.

Competent QB play will make the line better. Gumby's rule of thumb: Quarterbacking makes the line. The line does not make the quarterback.