2003Contenders

And you don't believe that JP is the answer because....? Personally, I don't know if he is or isn't the answer. And I don't think anyone does, even the coaches. Sam Wyche appears to be his biggest supporter -- but he's well aware of the uncertainties associated with young QBs. We've yet to see Losman start an NFL game, and what we have seen has been in "controlled" situations when a game was already out of hand. I'm not too worried about his dreadful performance against the Pats, just as I'm not overly excited about his quality performance against the Browns. I know the Bills' evaluation on him last year was that he had a better arm than any of the top 3 QBs (Manning, Roethlisberger, Rivers) coming out, other than Big Ben -- and that he was by far the most mobile of the 3. His perceived cocky attitude is the biggest reason that he was slotted by most as the 4th in this list. That could be a GOOD thing if he is cocky like Jim Kelly was... Or it could be a bad thing if he is cocky like Ryan Leaf was. What this tells me is that he has the physical tools to succeed. But does he have the brains, physical toughness, mental toughness, and intangibles? Again, we just don't know. You could argue that his fluke leg injury last year could reveal a durability problem. Or... you could point out that he took a beating in college -- and kept on ticking. Last year, JP was viewed as part of the top 4 QB mix by some teams, while others clearly had him in the second tier after the top 3 QBs. Some teams, like the Bills, Packers, and Rams viewed him as right there or better than the other 3. I know for a fact that the Packers had him ranked higher than Rivers, who went #4 overall last year. This year, I think he'd be ranked right there with Smith and Rodgers. Considering that neither Smith or Rodgers are apparantly as highly regarded as Manning/Rivers/Roethlisberger, I think you can make the case that JP would be the top rated QB this year. Again, it depends on which team is picking though... Remember when we drafted Moulds back in 1996, some teams felt that the Bills got a late first round steal, while a GM for one team said he wouldn't have taken him in the 7th round. It's all about perception.

I've heard rumors recently that Gruden really wants Alex Smith. If he's there at #5 and the Bucs take him, he could be inclined to trade a pick for Henry. Meanwhile, we know that Dennis Green feels that he must come away from this draft with a playmaker at CB. It all tells me that as various scenarios play themselves out in the draft, Henry's future will become more pronounced. We should have some indication early based on what TB does with the #5 pick and what Arizona does with the #8 pick. If they both take a RB, as many mock drafts have suggested, then Henry's stock declines in a major way. If one team or the other passes on a RB, it could mean that a deal is already in the works. If NEITHER takes a RB, then we may even have a bidding war on our hands. I doubt that we could manage the Cards' or Bucs' high second rounder, but maybe their high 3rd rounder? And maybe the Eagles get in on the bid with their late 2nd rounder?

Actually, since neither teams boasts a mighty offense, I would expect to see a heavy dose of Willis in those games, especially this early in the season. In fact, the game plan should be for J.P. to throw the ball just often enough to keep the defense honest.

I like that the schedule APPEARS to be easier early on. It gives JP the chance to get his feet wet and build his confidence up BEFORE the tougher games kick in. It also means that the coaching staff can afford to take his progression slowly, as we focus more on the running attack. Of course, we are basing our assessment of the strength or ease of the schedule on last year's record, rather than what we expect to see this year.

One thing to remember about Woodson's contract is that it was inflated in 2005 for two reasons... 1. Last year when the Raiders tagged him, they did so as an Exclusive Rights Frnachise Player, which somes with a larger price tag than the Non-exclsuive Rights tender. 2. This year, when they opted to tag him again, they had to pay him 120% over last year's salary, which is how he wound up with the $10 M number this year. Although Woodson's own number will play a role in inflating the franchise tag number next year --as it will undoubtedly be the top salary amongst the top 5 to be averaged -- the franchise number figures to be significantly less.

It's funny you bring this up, because I went on one of these time share tours when I was down there in Orlando a few weeks ago. I just did it for the free Disney tickets. 1. The price for a 1 bedroom (for just one week out of the year) was about $20 K. If you break that down (considering 1/52 of the total cost), that makes it over $1 Million for a one bedroom condo! 2. They try to break it down for you to pay for it on a monthly basis over five years. The interest rate is crazy (like 17%) -- and it winds up costing several hundred dollars per month. They will argue that you spend the money for just 5 years and it is yours for life. The reality is that what you pay per month for this thing is probably more than your lodging would cost for a week of vacation anyway. So, if you consider 60 months worth of payments, you realize quickly that you are spending as much or more than you would be spending for vacation lodging for the next 60 years! They will also make you believe that this is a real estate investment -- and that you will make a great deal of money when you sell it. However, you have to go through them to sell it, and it's not as easy as they make it sound. And with that crazy interest rate you paid at the time of buying it, you aren't likely to make as much as you'd think upon re-selling it. 3. The maintenance fees are ridiculous. It's like $500 per year... Make that $500 for your one week per year! 4. They will sell you on being able to trade your week for another week or another location. (Big deal!) They will also tell you that you are eligible for discounted cruises. Hmmmm. I see these discounted cruises available to the public all the time! 5. Don't get me wrong. The resort(s) are very nice. In fact, they sell themselves when you see them. It's just not worth the money, even if you like the concept of buying a condo for just one week out of the year. With real estate being so cheap (comparatively speaking, of course) down in Orlando, if you really want a vacation home down there, you are better served buying one outright. That's just my two cents worth...

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.