RunOJRun

I sometimes wonder whether there's a certain wisdom in drafting players who grew up or played college ball in cold weather states. Not only are these players used to the cold on game day, they might be less likely to leave town when free agency arrives, than someone who played HS and college ball in Florida or Texas. I have no statistics to back up this theory, just thinking that of the various factors which play into the decision to sign with a team, comfort level with the climate might rank somewhere in the 4th - 6th position after factors like money, front office reputation/culture of winning, who's the HC, where your wife's family is from, etc.

IMHO, any of the three Flair-Steamboat PPV/Clash of the Champions matches from '89 take that prize.

Getting one of the better O-linemen in the draft, without or without a new QB, does enable the Bills to consolidate their strengths while Wannstedt/Edwards sort out whether to go 3-4, 4-3, or hybrid and then determine which players already on the roster fit the selected D scheme. It would be a huge mistake to draft a front seven player who may not fit into the system (especially if the labor issues this year shorten or eliminate training camp). If the Bills took A.J. Green with the third pick, moved up into the lower first to get Carimi, Soldier, or Castonzo (or got one of them in the second round), that might not be such a bad thing. (This is assuming they don't see either Gabbert or Newton as franchise material).

Here's my prediction... The Bills will drop jaws throughout the NFL when, at the direction of Ralph Wilson, they draft BYU sensation Jimmer Fredette with the #3 pick. Wilson will cite Fredette's ability to put points on the board, strong moral character, leadership qualities, and upstate New York roots as the reasons for the pick. Wilson, of course, has no idea that Fredette is actually a basketball player.

It's funny (actually, it's sad) how some people excuse rape and other types of sexual abuse because the victim may be a sexually active adult and, therefore, "asking for it." Crimes of sexual assault occur when particular acts prohibited by law take place, regardless of the victim's own consentual sexual behavior or any other illegal behavior on the part of the victim. For example, a prostitute wraps up an evening's work during which she had sex with a number of customers. She's walking a few blocks home to her condo from the hotel where she saw her last customer, when she's pulled into an alley and raped at knifepoint. Despite the fact that she provides sexual favors for money, most likely illegal in her state of residence, she's no less a victim of rape than a 79 year old grandmother raped during a home invasion. If someone doesn't consent to sexual activity and it's forced upon them in some manner, it's a crime.

The problem is that while the Bills may very well be the worst team in the NFL over the course of the last ten years, they're never the worst team during any individual season, so the "can't miss" QB prospects are gone by the time the Bills pick in the first round. (Yeah, yeah, we could have taken Brady, but so could every other NFL team. Nobody saw that coming.) The "can't miss" guys are always gone after the first couple of picks and there will always be questions about any QB outside of a very small handful of prospects (maybe a few per decade). Take Newton or don't, take Gabbert or don't, but expect that improvement to the defense will likely result in a return to the sort of 6-10 to 8-8 record which ensures that the Bills will never get an elite QB until the NFL adopts a draft lottery and/or weighs long-term team performance into draft order.

It's funny, it seems like a lot of mock drafts jumped on the Newton to Buffalo bandwagon this week.

If they go with one of the high profile front seven players with the #3 pick, they've got to temper the BPA approach and ensure that they take someone who'll fit into whichever scheme they go with for next season. Don't take someone who's only played 4-3 if you're going 3-4 or visa versa. If you plan on running a hybrid system, make sure you take someone who can play either scheme. Picking a defensive player in the first round who doesn't fit your defense is about a smart as picking a running back in the first round when you've already got Lynch and Jackson on the roster.

OK, maybe QBs should be immune from being grabbed during their rookie and second seasons. If their team isn't willing to make them the designated starter by their third season and another team is willing to start them, they should be fair pickings for another team. (Really, what's the point of drafting a QB who is likely to hit free agency before you have any plans to play him? If your "aging quarterback" is in his early 30's, he might have a good five or more years left. You're better off signing an even older quarterback on the downside of his career to spot start occasionally should your starter be injured.) If there are fewer than 32 quarterbacks genuinely talented enough to start in the NFL, it hurts the sport if a few of those genuinely talented players stand around holding a clipboard when they could replace lesser talents on other teams. It's unfair to the player who could be starting elsewhere and improving his bargaining position when he's up for free agency and it's unfair to every fan who watches games which aren't as entertaining as they could be because a few teams are hoarding two worthy starters while other teams have none. Get the best players on the field and it benefits the sport.

When it comes to the Super Bowl, I'll root for any of the 13 other teams which have never won a Super Bowl. Which probably explains why I spent most of the last Super Bowl netsurfing.

If other teams in need of a QB pick Newton, Gabbert, and Mallett in the first round, they might not be particularly inclined to take a first round QB in 2012. Which means that you might not need the worst record in the NFL next year to get...lucky.

Agreed, they seem to spend money on whomever will take it. It might not be such a bad thing if they reduced payroll and hung onto the money until players worth the big bucks express legitimate interest in playing for the Bills.

How many times does this need to be said? The Bills *do* spend money; they had the 12th highest payroll in the 2009 season and were making huge offers to big name head coaches before last season. It's more a matter of free agents wanting to play for winning teams or, at least, teams where players have faith in the decision-making ability of the front office.

The NFL is always talking about maintaining parity (since keeping teams competitive is good for stadium attendance, TV ratings, merch sales, etc.). It seems to me that one way to further this aim is to ensure that every team has a decent starting QB. With so many things up in the air due to the current owndership/labor dispute, it seems like an opportune time for the union and/or owners to put new league rules and policies in place. With this backdrop, I'd like to see the NFL institute a policy which you could call "the quarterback grab." Here's how it would work...each team designates one QB on their roster at the beginning of a season as their protected starting quarterback. Any other QB on their roster can be claimed by any other NFL team at any point during the season, and that selected QB becomes the protected starting quarterback of the claiming team (The former protected QB of the claiming team then becomes another unprotected QB on their roster). To keep this from becoming a complete clustermess, any team in the NFL can make a claim just once during a season and any QB who has been claimed once during a season cannot be claimed additional times. Any team which selects a QB through this process must make that QB their new protected starter. Except for this situation, no team may change it's protected starting QB during the season (You can start and play other quarterbacks, but you can't protect those QBs. If you protected the wrong guy at the beginning of the season, you're out of luck. Of course, you're then free to select someone else's unprotected back-up QB if you're unhappy with whomever you're now starting.) To compensate the team which lost a QB, they would receive a compensatory additional draft pick in the second round in the following year's draft. When their turn comes up, they get to select two second round picks. This policy would prevent some NFL teams from having two or more first-rate QBs on their roster while other teams have none. It's a shame that teams like the Bills and Panthers had to make due with QBs this past season who essentially should have been back-ups, while Kevin Kolb rides the pine. Sure, a team which has lost a QB through this process may find themselves without a first rate starting QB, should their designated QB get injured. But that's the point of promoting league parity...a path is cleared for the weaker teams to get better and the stronger teams to be less dominating. I'd think that the union would get behind this policy, because it enables current back-up quarterbacks to maximize their potential for on-field success and maximum earnings by getting them off the bench and into the huddle.

This mash-up of the Eminem Chrysler ad and shots of the Detroit Lions is rather inspirational. We could use a video like this (Unfortunately, neither Ani DiFranco nor the Goo Goo Dolls play the kind of "rally the fanbase" music which would work in a video like this. Maybe Rochesterian Lou Gramm's "Midnight Blue" would work). http://www.nesn.com/2011/02/eminems-chrysler-super-bowl-commercial-collides-with-detroit-lions-in-new-video.html