2003Contenders

Like so many of you have said, we simply won't know who got the better end of the bargain for years to come. It also isn't fair to compare the players that were ultimatley selected by each team either. For example, it is doubtful that the Cowboys would have used their original pick on Loseman, since they had just acquired Henson -- just like it is doubtful that we would have selected J Jones. I recall a couple of years ago that Jimmy Johnson, who was one of the first to use a points-based value ranking system, indicated that he always viewed the value of a pick in THIS year's draft to be worth that of a round EARLIER in the following year's draft. That is to say, that a mid-round 2nd rounder in 2005 would be worth (on his points board) what a mid round 1st rounder is worth in 2006. Johnson's reasoning has been echoed by many on the board already: a year of development, knowing with assurance which player you are taking at a given point in time, etc. Also, last year was unique in the sense that the draft class was a very deep one -- while this year's class is much weaker at most positions. Credit TD and the scouting department with having done their homework. So while, the points associated with the #20 pick are set at a certain value NOW, to truly compare apples to apples, you would almost have to look at the points values associated with the #20 pick of the second round to fairly judge the value at the TIME of the trade last year. That is, are two second rounders and a 5th rounder worthy of a mid-to-late 1st rounder? All in all, I really think you can make the argument that it was a win-win trade with both sides coming away with what they wanted -- and both sides having to give up something to do it. Dallas will maintain that they had Julius Jones ranked right there with Steven Jackson -- and that they considered taking him with the the #22 pick. The Bills have argued that they had JP ranked right up there with Manning, Rivers, and Roethlisberger. We'll see.

He's also the one who speculated years ago that Troy Aikman was gay.

The funny thing is that the deal is not THAT much better than the one that TD presented, that was supposedly an insult. For PW to have signed so quickly, my thinking is that the Bills really didn't want him back -- or he really didn't want to be back after all, considering that he never gave us an opportunity to match.

At the time there was some speculation that the Bills had their sights on Harrington with the #4 pick, which is why the Bledsoe deal didn't go down until later that day. Although nothing has ever come out of OBD officially -- after all, they wouldn't want Big Mike to think that he was a contingency plan -- the prevailing belief by those in the know was that TD thought that the Lions were going to draft Quentin Jammer (or trade that pick to another team interested in Jammer) and had his sights on Harrington. In fact, when Harrington wasn't there, TD himself admitted that he tried to trade down but couldn't find any takers. The funny thing is that the Redskins used their end-of-the-round pick on Patrick Ramsey -- then almost immediately contacted the Bills to see if they were willing to trade away the following year's #1, plus their second rounder in exchange for Ramsey. TD wisely told them thanks but no thanks. A little while later the Bledsoe deal was announced. So, on that day we almost had Harrington, could have had Ramsey, and wound up with Drew. Despite all of the criticism of Drew, I still believe that TD made the best decision that day.

Personally, I do not see what all the fuss is about. We know that the Bills want PW back -- and we know that he wants to be back. I applaud TD for offering a contract that doesn't mortgage our future -- but at the same time, I can't blame PW and his agent for seeing what he may be able to get out there in free agency. I think, if PW is presented with a fair offer that he will give TD the opportunity to match it. If the offer is outrageous, then I cannot blame him for accepting it -- nor could I blame TD for refusing to match it.

I'm positive about Woodson's contract situation. Last year the Raiders designated him with the Exclusive Rights tag, which cost them about $2M more than the Non-exclusive rights tag would have (namely because the ER Tag is based on the April 15 average top 5 salary). This year when they used the franchise tag again, Woodson was guaranteed either top 5 money -- or 120% of last year's salary, whichever was greater. Since he made over $8 M last year, the latter was clearly the greater number. You are right, however, that Ty Law's contract did inflate the CB franchise tag number this year. The basic cost of applying the tag on a CB was about $8.8 M this year. My guess (purely a guess) is that the tag would cost between $7 and $8 M next year, assuming no other inflated contracts.

One point about Woodson's $10.5 M. The cost of the tag for a CB is much less than that. However, after he was designated with the tag (as an exclusive rights franchise player to boot) last year, his 2004 salary was inflated -- and he commanded an increase of 20% over what he made last year, which is greater than what the franchise tender would have been this year. So, if we tag Nate, it would likely "only" be in the $7-$8 M range next year. And if some other team wants to shell out two number ones for him, that is OK too.

Actually the trade for Jeff George was not that bad for the Falcons. He took them to the playoffs his first year there. The problem came in the second year, when he and June Jones got into a shouting match on the sidelines... and Jones, with his feelings hurt, elected to bench George.

What it tells me -- especially in relation to the rather large contract that Griese signed -- is that Gruden has ZERO confidence in Simms.

Maybe Clarrett has been humbled by this whole ordeal. I seriously doubt that a second-day draft pick will have the leverage to start problems in the locker-room. If nothing else, he will be motivated to keep his mouth shut and prove the nay-sayers wrong. And, I still do see MC as a Day 2 pick, even with a strong workout. For starters, this is a VERY strong RB class, with quality players potentially falling as far as the 3rd round. We know how teams over-analyze the most mundane situations heading into the draft. So, his two years out of football and attitude problems are going to continue to cost him -- no matter how much damage control he and his agent provide leading up to the draft. The Phillips comparison isn't fair. MC has been childish, foolish, and has made a history of mistakes -- but he is not a criminal, as Phillips was/is. Also, he's not going to be a 1st round pick with carte blanche as Phillips was. I'd say that if he is on the board in the 5th/6th round (depending on what kind of quality we've picked up in the preceding rounds), he is worth the risk. It's not as if most players taken that late stick anyway. And it may just be another situation, where we land a guy with an enormous chip on his shoulder. I just don't see the down-side.

Good point, jad1! In fact, those in the know all say that the ultimate decision to get rid of Drew outright -- and start JP was Mularkey's. Damn that ego-maniac Donahoe for siding with the head coach!

It just dawned on me that SoCal-Surf is RJ! His username gave it away. That also explains why he can't let go of the ancient trade made back in 2002, just a couple months after TD cut him...

I think it was the coach-speak that Wyche and Mularkey have been branding into his brain -- namely, that the team can win with its defense, special teams, and an emphasis on a running game. They are trying to get JP to understand that he isn't the savior -- and won't have to take the team on his shoulders to win. Not only does that take pressure off him, but it is an early attempt to get through to him that he needs NOT force the ball in foolish situations...

I still think the dark horse team in all of this is Cleveland.

Based on what the Ravens saw of Drew last year -- 4 INTs that cost the Bills a very winnable game -- I doubt that they want any part of him. I seem to remember Kyle Boller doing very little against our defense that day, but at least he didn't single-handedly cost his team the win.

You are correct. The recent restructure of Moulds' contract freed up about $3 M, which put us in the $12M under range. The release of Drew next week will free up $2M+ more. So we'll be under the cap by about $14 M at that time.

Also, if you're a TE, you probably want to play for a team like Buffalo with a conservative game plan and a young QB -- lots of dump off passes to the TE.

Knowing Drew like we know him, Shameless Homer may be right. Regardless, I don't think Drew meant it as an insult. At worst, he meant from a prideful point of view that he wouldn't be able to back up the guy he once mentored.

This shouldn't surprise anyone that has watched TD over the years -- both here and in Pittsburgh. He's never been a fan of having a potential starter serve as a backup. Even in 2001, when there were real risks with RJ, he stuck with AVP. With Bledsoe struggling, we relied on AVP and Shane. Clearly TD does not like QB controversies -- and believes in providing his starter with 100% support. Looking at it this way, Shane is HIS perfect candidate for the backup job.

It's all about semantics, isn't it? After all, there is a subtle difference in saying that we "gave up" picks vs that we "invested" draft picks. With that said, it is a true statement that we INVESTED a 1st round, a 2nd round, and 5th round draft pick on JP -- just like we invested a 1st and a 4th round pick on RJ back in 1998. Let's hope our investment works out better this time.

You are probably right. I imagine that JP is going to make his fair share of mistakes. In fact, if the wild stallion comparison to Favre come close to being true, we can buckle ourselves down for a wild ride in 2005. In Favre's first full year as a starter, he threw 24 picks. But he also had firm, capable coaches in Holmgren, Reid, Gruden, and Mariucci that recognized his potential. With Wyche, Clemments, and Mularkey on hand, let's cross our fingers... BTW, the Packers also made it to the playoffs that year -- and didn't have near the supporting cast that we have.

Before I get started, let me reinforce that I am not a Bledsoe apologist -- nor do I subscribe to the theory that the organization is always right. With that said, I will say that I agree with this move 100%, because I think it is time to move on. Like Bledsoe or not, if you are calling the trade that TD made to acquire him "an error", then you really don't know much about the game of football. Even if Bledsoe admittedly didn't do everything for us that I had hoped he would, his acquisition achieved all of the following: 1. Provided instant credibility in a way that drafting a first round QB never could have. Let's not forget that we picked 4th in the 2002 draft for a reason... We were a horrible 3-13 the year before. Recall that Joey Harrington was selected one pick ahead of us that year. Now there is talk that the Lions' patience is wearing thin with him. They still do not know whether or not he is the answer, while we've decided to move on without Drew. With a veteran you're more prone to make these kinds of determinations than you are with a young player that you keep HOPING will get better. The Lions (with Harrington) nor the Texans (with Carr, who finally came on last season) invested high picks on QBs that year, and neither team has finished as high as 8-8 since. The Bills were 8-8 or better 2 out of the 3 years Bledsoe was here. 2. Through the first half of the 2002 season, Drew was arguably the MVP of the NFL. Let's not forget that he crushed many of our team's single-season passing records. Look at what happened with attendence. 3. The success of the passing game inflated the value of Peerless Price. If that doesn't happen, I can guarantee you that Peerless still leaves for the highest bidder -- and we have no leverage (or logical reason) for using the Franchise Tag to secure that 1st round pick. You could even argue that we traded our #14 pick and Peerless for Drew and the #21 pick. I think even Drew bashers would make that deal (especially back in 2002) every time. 4. The successful shift from 3-13 in 2001 to 8-8 in 2002 identified us as a team on the verge. Surely that is what attracted such important free agents as Takeo, Sam Adams, Lawyer Milloy, etc. I find it highly unlikely that all of these guys come here if Drew doesn't have that magical 2002 season. I could go on talking about Drew also being a good guy in the community and all that, but that dilludes my point, which is that we reaped enough benefits from having Drew on the team, that it was certainly worth the (then) future middle-of-the-first-round draft pick that TD gave up for him.

I liken this move to the Flutie/Johnson move that TD made back in 2001. Flutie was a known commodity, who wasn't getting any younger. RJ, due to his past injury situation, was still somewhat of an unknown commodity. We had so much invested in RJ that TD and the coaching staff had to at least see whether or not RJ was the long term answer. Unfortunately, he proved not to be. "No harm done", says TD. "Now we know. Adios, RJ, I'll trade for Drew Bledsoe." We were in a similar situation with Drew and JP this year. Drew, the known commodity and JP the unknown. None of us knows just how good JP is going to be -- and neither does the coaching staff. I've read speculation that this move was based on how good JP has looked so far in the off-season, but that doesn't tell us anything -- and the coaches know that. The truth of the matter is that with so much at stake -- and with a team built to win now, the coaches needs to know right away whether of not they can count on JP. They don't have 2-3 years to let him while away his time on the bench and watch as Bledsoe leads us back to another borderline winning season. If JP isn't up to the challenge, then we will know -- and we can head into 2006 with another plan in mind. Kudos to the team for taking a chance at being great -- rather than playing it safe and settling for "good".

Two reasons... 1. J.P. now knows that he is the starter. There is a difference in pre-season preparation in knowing that he is THE guy versus the possibility that he COULD be the guy. TD has always been a firm believer in knowing who your QB is and avoiding any kind of off-field distraction. That's why, sad to say, I predict that he will NOT bring in someone like Brad Johnson or Jeff Garcia. Rather, I expect a low key acquisition like Charlie Batch or Kordell Stewart -- capable backups, but not really likely to compete for the starting job. 2. They wanted to treat Drew with some class and give him the best opportunity to latch on with another team as the starter elsewhere. So while other teams are trying to figure their QB situation out, Drew will have a leg up on the competition for a starting job in Dallas or Cleveland.

Actually what I found most interesting about the Bledsoe discussion is that, according to Clayton, the Bills have NOT asked Bledsoe to take a paycut or comepete for his job. He said the team wants to close the Bledsoe chapter and move on. Golic's concern was that he didn't think that the team wanted to take such a leap of faith with Loseman, which is why he predicted that Bledsoe would be back. Clayton said he agreed with Golic, but that the Bills were committed to Loseman. That part of the conversation ended with Greeny saying, "We'll get our friend Tom Donahoe on here to get to the bottom of this."