2003Contenders

I always thought it was odd that TD saw fit to sign McGee to a big-dollar extension, but never did so with Nate. I honestly blame the current situation with Nate on TD, rather than Marv.

Actually, the thought of moving Williams to the left side did NOT seem that far-fetched at the time. Remember that he had protected Chris Simms' blind-side in college. Also, Jennings was transitioning to LT at the time, and he was pretty effective when healthy. Thus, taking Williams, who was a RT -- which was really the greater position of need at the time -- but who still seemed to have the upside to eventually move to LT should Jennings not be up to the task (which he was) or eventually fly the coup (which he did 2 years later) made him a compelling selection over McKinney -- who made it known ahead of time that he wanted a big payday. Yes, Williams turned out to be a bust. But I won't point fingers, since I was on board with the pick at the time myself.

Right now -- without knowing what kinds of moves they will make in free agency -- there are a huge number of directions that the Bills could go with that #12 pick (including trading up or down). However, drafting Brady Quinn is not one of them.

The only good thing about possibly having so many key holes to fill is that the best player available at the time we pick will also likely just so happen to fill a position of need!

I know I am in the minority, but I STILL do not think it is a foregone conclusion that Nate is gone. I think the point is that he REALLY wants to test free agency (which it is in his best interest to do) -- and will keep the Bills in the loop about his negotiation status. I believe that the team will have the opportunity to match the best offer he receives. If that offer truly is over-the-top, then the Bills should in good conscience let him go. It's funny that Mort was critical of the Bills front office for not signing some of their top free agents to long-term contracts BEFORE they became free agents. He has a point. However, it was his buddy Tom Donahoe that screwed the pooch on the Nate deal, as Marv inherited the situation last season, when he was forced to use the franchise tag.

I kinda agree with you here. With that said, I also think that there was a bit of arrogance on the part of TD, where he decided to make risky picks to wow everyone, rather than doing what may have been the smart thing at the time. I've never beat him up for taking Mike Williams, because I thought he was a good/safe pick at the time. However, when he drafted Willis, I was upset, because I felt at the time that -- even if Willis played as well as hoped -- the risk simply was NOT worth the reward, given the holes we had elsewhere. With Henry on hand, there was simply no compelling reason to make that move. Of course, I also did not like the Roscoe pick in 2005; although he actually showed some promise last season.

Unfortunately, I think a move from 12 to 3 would require A LOT more than just Willis and a 3rd rounder. In fact, I doubt any such move would come with less than an additional first round pick -- which we can't afford to give away. I could, however, see Marv waiting to see if Peterson drops out of the top 5-6 and then trying to move up.

I agree. The only point you are missing is the player's role in all of this. Henry forced the Bills' hand -- and now Willis is saying that he will sit out if the team doesn't sign him to a long-term deal. When I first heard the reports that the Giants had approached the Bills, I was excited. Now it sounds like the Bills are shopping Willis, which is more ominous in terms of being able to get anything worthwhile in return. Whether a trade is made or not before draft day, I'd like to see the Bills bring in someone (either via the draft or free agency) to at least challenge Willis for the job -- and provide some insurance if he does hold out.

And let's not forget Bruuuuuuce.

Actually, it seems that Nate was/is bound, set and determined to test the free agent market. Thus, he was unlikely to sign a long-term contract with ANYBODY last season. That would explain why teams were uninterested in trading away anything for a player, who was set to become a free agent at season's end. Although the Bills did hold all of the cards -- and Nate eventually would have avoided holding out -- the deal that he and Marv reached (not to re-tag him in 2007) was to ensure that he reported to training camp on time.

I know you were saying this with tongue firmly planted in cheek. But, believe it or not, Norv has more playoff wins as a head coach over the last decade than Marty does... And Norv only ever led his team to the playoffs ONCE!

Good points... Call me crazy, but I am not overly troubled by this notion of not being able to spend a crazy amount of money in free agency this season. This year it is a player's market -- and we have enough holes to fill that I'd rather not load up for bear on a player or two -- and mortgage our future. Maybe it's not such a bad idea to build the nucleus of the team through the draft and with prudent moves in free agency. Of course, the caveat here is to make sure that you find a way to keep the young players you do want, which means signing them long-term BEFORE they become free agents. That's why I would advocate getting a long term deal with Lee Evans done right away.

Excellent point about the replacements for those players. Although we are unlikely to find an immediate replacement for Nate, we can live with a bit of a downgrade there (someone like Philly's Hood), provided that we upgrade other areas of the defense, most importantly the DL. Without coming out and saying it, I think the coaches were not as high on Fletcher-Baker as many of us were. It will be interesting to see how they plan on filling his inevitable vacancy. I'm also not convinced that Kelsay is a goner. However, even if he does bolt, I don't see Hargrove as a downgrade. So, maybe I'm just drinking red, white and blue cool aide -- but I am not too worried about losing these players. In the best of all possible worlds, I'd like to keep Nate. However, if ownership is serious about not shelling out large signing bonuses -- and keeping him means that we lose out on upgrading 3-4 other positions, I think we have to wave goodbye. Remember that we are not talking about trying to keep together a world championship defense here. This defense has ranked toward the bottom of the league in each of the last 2 seasons. Thus, no player on that side of the ball should be viewed as a sacred cow.

I agree that it is unlikely that he lasts that long. Honestly, if he slips out of the top 10, I would imagine some team further down that REALLY wants him would seriously consider moving up to get him. It's funny how fluid projections are for RBs. Two years ago, 3 of them (Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, and Cadillac Williams) went within the first five picks of the draft -- and none of them thus far has proven worthy of going so high. Meanwhile, Larry Johnson and Steven Jackson -- both of whom WERE considered the best in their class coming out of school in 2003 and 2004 respectively -- fell toward the end of the first round. Those two guys are now among the top 5 RBs in the NFL.

God knows I loved Thurman, but he wasn't ALWAYS such a great leader... he had a tendency to stew every now and then. And, aside from that great performance in the first Super Bowl, he came up very small when we needed him the most.

Just because Peterson is a top 5 prospect, it does not mean that he will be drafted in the top 5. While it is unlikely that he would fall that far, something like that could happen if the teams picking in the top 15 feel that they have a greater need at another position. Personally, I think he would be hard for the Bills to pass up at 12, if he falls that far. With all of that said, this guy's mock draft is definitely different from conventional opinion about how the players should be ranked -- and I second-guess a good number of his picks.

There are many compelling reasons to consider drafting a DT early again this season... 1. McCargo is an unproven commodity. 2. Even if McCargo pans out, you can never have enough big bodies to rotate on the interior of the DL. Just because we went that direction last season, doesn't mean we shouldn't go that way again. The Jags drafted Stroud and Henderson in the first round in consecutive seasons. That worked out pretty well for them. 3. Thankfully, Anderson is a goner, so we may as well seek an upgrade. 4. For as much as K Williams was a pleasant surprise last season, he is not a long term solution. 5. The interior was horrible at stopping the run last season -- and still needs to be addressed. With Clements and London both possibly gone, we may have needs to fill at DT, CB, and MLB in addition to our always OL requirement. With the 12th pick overall, we will probably have the luxury of taking the best player available -- without having to pinpoint a specific position. Heck we could even draft a WR or RB with that pick if there is a player too good to pass up there (i.e. Peterson).

Are you guys talking about Will Blaylock? If so, he's probably a Day 2 pick.

Actually the Redskins were in BIG trouble last year prior to the CBA extension. In fact, it was Lavar Arrington's willingness to return some of his original signing bonus (effectively buying his way off the team) that allowed them to sneak under the cap. This year, even with the large cap ($109 M), which has MOST teams in great shape, the Skins are still having to resort to these kinds of restructures to save face. The bigger problem for them is that they don't get good value for their mis-spent money. Last year Archuleta and Brunell may have been the high paid scout team players in NFL history...

Jansen's original base salary was set to be $4.25 M this year. Without knowing the full details of his contract, by spreading the $10 M signing bonus over a five year extension, assuming that his new base is something around the league minimum, that should cut this portion of his cap liability down to less than $3 M this year. Thus, the 'Skins probably saved between $1 M to $1.5 M against the cap in 2007 by doing this. Of course, Jansen has a nasty history of injuries, so you have to wonder how wise this decision was in the long haul.

The sad thing is that he STILL out-rushed Willis last year.

One thing I always found interesting about the situation is that when the 2003 season came to an end both Gregg and Killdrive were gone -- as was the OL coach at the time. Thus, Brown's departure was NOT driven by animosity from the coaching staff.

A few years ago the Jags picked DTs in the first round in two straight drafts. Marcus Stroud and John Henderson have done a fine job solidifying the interior of that line for years to come. Without knowing about what is going to happen between now and draft day (i.e. free agent gains and losses), I see no reason to pass on Okoye if he is there.

I'm guessing that someone was trying to make the comparisons between Polian's Colts and Bills teams.

Excellent points. The funny thing is that Reyes was probably the highest profile FA signing of all from last year. For what it's worth, in Chris Brown's blog yesterday, he predicted that the Bills will let Gandy walk and go after Eric Steinbach in a major way. Also, don't get too excited about Briggs. Supposedly he and the Giants' Antonio Pierce are good friends -- and Pierce has been trying to woo him to come play for the Giants. Pierce told the press that he didn't think that the Giants would be able to afford Briggs... If the Giants can't afford him, where does that leave the Bills?