2003Contenders

Actually, I think this was a win-win situation for both teams. Willis joins a proven winning team in Baltimore. He'll also be surrounded by fellow Miami alumni like Ed Reed and Ray Lewis, who will look out for him -- and make sure he is motivated to play. Thus, it stands to reason that Willis will do well for the Ravens.

I am in agreement that there are no ample replacements out there. Perhaps a combination of, say, A-Train and Dillon will be sufficient to carry us through 2007 until whomever we pick in the draft begins to emerge. After all, if by replacement you mean a back capable of matching Willis' 3.8 YPC average, well then these guys should make do just fine. I think the trade is more about addition by subtraction than it is anything else. That is, the front office simply wanted to wash their hands of Willis for once and for all. Time to move on...

Considering that the pick was a risk given his knee situation in the first place, I do not believe you can call him a bust. In fact, after the 2004 season he looked like a very good pick. Sadly, he never came close to matching the passion he showed that year. I think "disappointment" may be a more appropriate word. I know it's just semantics, but to me a "bust" is more devastating than a mere disappointment. My frustration here is less aimed at Willis than it is at TD for taking him in the first place. As I said, the pick itself was a risk -- one that was NOT worth taking, considering the other holes this team has had since then.

What a lazy and poorly thought-out article from Sullivan this morning! Sullivan says that Marv is playing his cards all wrong... He claims that bringing in these other RBs shows that the front office is desperate to get rid of Willis -- and that his trade value will decline. Well, first off, we're not talking about world class, elite RBs that the Bills are bringing in. Any one of these guys (Rhodes, Brown, Dillon) would have to be part of a RBBC. Jerry also fails to mention that Anthony Thomas is a free agent -- and perhaps the Bills are looking for a replacement for him. And, yes, Jerry, the team DOES need to be proactive in preparing for a possibility of life without Willis. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise. The bottom line is that with the dwindling market for RBs, it also HELPS the Bills' cause in terms of Willis' value to entertain the possibility of signing other RB FAs -- as Willis represents more of a scarce commodity. Sullivan talks about the lack of interest from other teams in acquiring Willis by pointing out that the Broncos signed Travis right away and the Jets were quick to trade for Thomas Jones. Well, it is true that both of those guys could be upgrades over Willis. However, Jerry fails to mention (probably because he's too out-of-the-loop to really know) that the Broncos WERE highly interested in Willis before the Titans released Travis. Suddenly, they could pick up Travis for nothing versus having to give up something in a trade for Willis. Also, the Jets were right to jump on the Jones trade -- as all they gave up was a swap of 2nd round picks with the Bears. The word we hear is that the Bills may be able to get the Ravens' 2nd round pick (and possibly an extra pick too) in exchange for Willis. That sounds like a better deal to me than what the Bears got for Jones. Also, Jerry, remember back to when TD traded Travis to the Titans. All he managed to land was a FUTURE 3rd round pick. Now, I'm not going to get overly excited because no trade has been made yet -- and we have no way of knowing what kind of compensation that the Bills will ultimately get for Willis. But, then again, neither do you, Jerry.

Wonder if there is any correlation to this and his weak showing in the playoffs this year?

Remember that the Franchise Tag entitles the Bears to TWO first round picks should any team sign Briggs and the Bears not choose to match it. That is in and of itself way too much. Thus, we (or another potential trading partner) would have to work out an alternative trade with the Bears for the right to sign Briggs. I would be willing to give up our #12 pick to make the deal, but I think we have too many other holes to fill elsewhere to consider giving up much more than that.

Yea, too bad Mort's buddy TD didn't sign Nate to an extension before he became a free agent -- and new GM Marv was forced to use the Franchise Tag.

Don't read too much into this report, as it sounds like cancellation of his Thursday trip to Detroit may have been brought about by his delay in getting to Buffalo today. According to the other Chris Brown, THIS Chris Brown probably won't even visit with the Bills' brass until tomorrow. Check out Chris Brown's Blog

I've always had the feeling that Willis rubbed Marv and Dick the wrong way when he refused to show up for voluntary workouts last season. Frankly, he's not done much since then to gain their favor.

Considering that they pick toward the end of each round, I don't think we should make the deal without getting at least their 2nd rounder -- or a player.

Agreed. Also, don't forget McGee's struggles last year. In my mind, even if AY looks like the real deal, we still need some help at CB.

1. He is a thug 2. He drops too many passes

Nah, I don't see A-Train getting much attention from other teams out there. The Bills know this, and they know that he serves as a safety net of last resort if they can't sign an upgrade. Plus, they are waiting to see what happens with Willis.

Maybe a short-term combination of Dillon AND Chris Brown. Then also invest a 2nd or 3rd rounder on a college RB for the long-haul.

I like Brown as a change-of-pace back or part of a RBBC -- just not as an every-down back. If used properly, in a Brian Westbrook type role, I think he can be a real playmaker. I just question his durability. In his career, he's only ever carried the ball more than 30 times in a game ONCE. He's also not a TD machine -- just 11 career rushing TDs. Also, aside from a that fine 2004 season in which he eclipsed the 1000 yard mark in just 11 starts, he's never cracked the 4.0 YPC mark for a season. He is, however, a pretty good receiver. For example, back in 2005, when he had to share time with Travis, he caught 25 passes for 327 yards.

Is he scheduled to come in for a visit? Or are you wondering what the response would be if he WERE coming in? I have no problem with it as long as he plays the same role as he did for NE last year. In fact, he may not be such a bad signing EVEN IF Willis stays on the staff.

Maybe we'll get a 3rd rounder for Anderson yet!

I wonder why he made no mention of Randy Starks...

Of course, we may not have a #1 pick at all, if we take Briggs off Chicago's hands...

With all of the RB signings this year, I would NOT be too terribly surprised to see Peterson fall to 12. Remember the year we took Willis, he was the first RB taken -- and he went 21. (Larry Johnson went a few picks later.) The year we traded up for JP, Steven Jackson was the first back taken -- and he went with the following pick (23). I still think that one of those top 10 teams will take him -- or some other team will trade up for him... but stranger things have happened.

He came and went today, right? Marv's MO has been to sign them before they leave.

McNally's philosophy is to get the best 5 on the field at the same time. The left side is set with Peters-Dockery-Fowler. Given the large contract, Walker fits in somewhere -- but it will depend on whether the team feels that he underachieved at RT for the Raiders last year and decides to put him there again this year -- or if they believe that he's a better fit at RG, given his propensity to get beat by outside speed rushers at the RT position last season. Assuming he plays RT, I think there will be an open competition at RG with Whittle, Preston, and possibly Butler fighting it out. If they see Walker as a better fit at RG, then look for Butler and Pennington to press for the starting RT position.

I hear ya. The thing is that I believe that Marv understands that he holds all of the cards in relation to Willis. That is, Willis is signed, cheap, in the final year of his contract -- and once he comprehends exactly what the Bills did over the weekend in terms of improving the run blocking, he will probably be highly motivated to return for 2007. Thus, The Bills are not desperate to trade him in the same manner that, say, the Bears were with Thomas Jones' contract demands and Cedric Benson already on the roster. If the team can get a fantastic trade offer for Willis, great. Otherwise, we're better off with him on the roster -- unless Marv and Dick simply do not want him on the team. And, if they feel that way, he'll be gone anyhow.

I give Marv some credit here. Reyes was one of the biggest free agent signings we had last season. When he was not performing last season, rather than being stubborn and trying to insist that the signing was a good one, the team elected to move on without him after the bye week.

Yes, Turner is a RFA, but the Chargers gave him the top tender, which means that it would cost a 1st and a 3rd to sign him.