2003Contenders

Donahoe is gone... He hasn't found an axe to grind (or a dead horse to beat) with Marv just yet.

Excellent points... And to those still crying about the switch from Flutie to RJ, let's not forget how divisive Flutie had become by that point. I really think that he had lost some of his teammates in the lockerroom by his refusal to accept blame for losses -- and accepting the credit for that "Flutie Magic" in 10-7 type victories (of which there were many that year), when the thanks really should have gone to the fine defense. Recall the week leading up to the game that Andre Reed (Yes, I know he was at the end of his line -- but still...) had become quite vocal in his contempt for Flutie, and there were still people (many of them right here on this board) that blamed Flutie for hanging Thurman our to dry on a floater screen pass that wound up sidelining Thurman for most of the season. Not trying to spark the Flutie/RJ debate again, just trying to remind everyone what the real atmosphere was like at the time.

I've always liked Vic, but he is not the Buffalo insider he once was, since hitting the national scene. Thus, his gut feeling about Nall is probably no better than any of ours. Still, I could see a situation happening here that was very similar to what happened in Carolina a few years ago, when Jake Delhomme came off the bench to become a solid starting QB. Recall that many observers criticized the Panthers for taking a shot in free agency at the little known Cajun... The similarities (even considering the success in another football league) seem remarkable.

Must be Monkey See Monkey Do over there at ESPN. Wasn't LP the one who wrote an article talking about what a great player McCargo would be -- and that he had cemented himself as a first round pick in the days leading up to the draft?

It sounds like the short-term plan is t have McCargo spell Tripplett and play along side him in passing downs. However, the coaches apparantly feel that McCargo can add some weight if he needs to play alongside Tripplett in oter situations.

Nate has very little leverage here. After a Pro Bowl 2004 campaign, he is coming off a mediocre 2005 season. Thus, he knows that his stock is especially low right now. That's why he really does NOT want to go out on the free market. He knows that he is more valuable to the Bills than anyone else, which is why he is demanding the big contract with the large signing bonus. If the parameters were reasonable, I'd hope that Marv would come to terms with him, as we could be buying low -- and fortifying our secondary for years to come. However, something tells me that Nate's demands are NOT reasonable, which is why the stalemate continues. When it come down to the final hour, when the deadline for signing the tag hits, Nate will be smart enough to realize that it is in his best interest to sign the tag and play for free agency in 2007. Considering the draft that the Bills just had, I doubt that they'd re-tag him then, considering the $9 M price tag.

I remember that game he played against us all too well. He also got injured in that game -- and was forced to bench for the next several thereafter. He is what he is: a quality backup, who is capable of spelling a starter for a game or two. For that reason, I'd imagine that the Titans would want to keep him around.

I think they preferred Whitner because he is a natural SS, although he can play any spot in the secondary. Huff is a better fit as a FS.

Sorry but the Rams just traded down and got SOMETHING for doing so. The Bills could have had at least what they got -- and still wound up with the guy they liked at #15.

Mary-o as opposed to Mario... I've heard that Williams HATES it when people mispronounce his name like that.

I think when the smoke settles that TM amd ML will likely provide us with a somewhat boring draft. That isn't meant as an insult. The Bills probably won't do much in the way fo trading and will likely take players of value without raising any eyebrows. Considering that I for one think that they have done a pretty good job in free agency to the point where we can be slightly more flexible than would have otherwise been the case. Still, I fully expect us to come away with a OT, DT, and DB on Day 1. It just may not be in the order that we had hoped.

If that happens, in my opinion, you HAVE to take Leinart. Even if the Bills do not have plans for him, they can follow the same plan that the Chargers did with Eli two years ago.

Maybe there is a CB they like there.

Could Bunkley be another Rien Long -- or A. Hawthorn? Both of these DTs had been projected as first rounders and both fell to Day 2 of the draft.

I like the idea of moving up, especially if we make the deal with Philly to trade down earlier. That way we'd likely still have a 2nd round pick to work with too.

I'll be honest, I thought Anderson was a good signing last year too. After all, he had been one of the blockers for Jamal Lewis' 2100-yard season. That isn't to say that Reyes will be a similar bust -- or that he isn't a good acquisition. I guess I'm just saying that we'll have to wait and see...

I get the distinct impression that the Bills camp is divided on whom they will take, assuming that someone like D'Brick doesn't fall to them. Clearly OL and DL represent our biggest need. Modrak pretty much made it clear that he sees no other OL besides D'Brick worthy of being selected in the top 10. If he somehow gets past the Jets, selecting him at #8 becomes a no brainer. Otherwise... I get the feeling that there are some vocal supporters of Huff and there are other vocal supporters of Vernon Davis. The staff appears to feel that either is a better "football player" than Bunkley/Ngata. Of course, either of the DTs would fill a bigger position of need. Indeed, Marv let it slip that he feels (without naming names) that a particular player that they are interested in COULD be available 4 spots later in the draft. So with all of these mock drafts that are out there, no one -- not even the Bills' front office -- knows what they are going to do with the #8 pick yet.

Yea, imagine if that did SOMEHOW happen... The author must have been a Bills fan, suffering from a case of the wet dreams.

It won't happen, because there's no way that D'Brick falls past #8. And I still think it is unlikely that he falls that far... (Those damn Jets!)

No one is going to like this, but if the rumor is true, then it adds validity to the assessment that John Clayton made this morning: namely that the Jets are not interested in Lienart at all and would take D'Brick if they couldn't make a trade to gte out of that spot. We've said all along that if D'Brick gets past the Jets at #4 that he'd likely fall to us at #8. Well, the Jets are probably aware of that too, which is why they would like to work this deal with the Raiders -- trade down to #7, pick up an extra pick or two, and STILL wind up with the player they really want. Of course, the Raiders may decide themselves that they'd rather stay where they are at, since Leinart -- like Ferguson -- isn't likely to be drafted by either team picking at #5 and #6.

I think Marv may indeed be targeting Cleveland at #12. Remember his comment that the guy they expect to take would probably still be available 4 picks later?

The Saints COULD do like the Chargers did with Eli in 2004 -- and draft Leinart, and then trade him to another team later in the draft.

The question is: Why did SF who needs A LOT of help, do it?

I'm going to go against the grain a bit here and defend TD on his Round 1 decisions over the years... 2001: Traded down for Nate Clements: hardly a shocking move, and it turned out to be one of the better moves he made during his time as GM both in terms of the decision to trade down and in terms of the player selected. 2002: Well, Big Mike as we know turned out to be a bust. However, he was hardly a shocking pick, and seemed like a safe one at the time. TD desperately wanted to trade down but couldn't find a partner. 2003: Managing to steal a 1st rounder from Atlanta in exchange for Peerless was a great move. Some would argue that Willis was a luxury pick, but if the team had elected to pick based on need, they would have selected Chris Kelsay, whom they ultimately grabbed in the 2nd round anyway. Besides, based on what we've seen from Henry since then, you'd have to agree that TD was forward-thinking in looking for a potential improvement. Considering the forfeiture of the original 1st rounder for Bledsoe, who gave us a great 2002 season (which inflated Peerless' value), we can say that we traded Price (the following year) plus 7 spots in the first round (the following year) in exchange for Bledsoe. Or, if you'd rather, we traded Price and Ty Warren for Bledsoe and Willis McGahee. I think you make that deal every time. 2004: Lee Evans was hardly a surprise pick, as he is the guy most scouts expected us to take. It's still early, but so far he seems worthy of the selection. The surprise that year was the decision to move up to get JP. Obviously the verdict is still out (See below). 2005: Our first round pick was actually JP Losman, whom we traded a 2nd and 4th for the right to get him a year early. There is little doubt in my mind that the team would have gone QB here if they hadn't done so the year before. The scouts identified an exceptionally week QB class in 2005, which is why they elected to gamble on JP in 2004. Again, with just 8 starts under his belt, it is too early to tell whether or not he willpan out. But he has no less chance of doing so than Jason Campbell or Aaron Rogers, the 2 QBs that may have been there for us. In fact, with a limited sample size, Losman looked BETTER than last year's #1 overall draft pick, Alex Smith. Being that the Bills don't have as much tied up (money-wise) as the Niners do in Smith, Buffalo is in a better position to cut bait if the front office determines that JP isn't the guy. The criticism for this draft hinges on the decision to draft tiny Roscoe Parrish in the 2ND round. Again, we will have to see how that plays out, but my guess is that TD knew that Moulds was not going to be back in 2006 and was making a contingency plan. Clearly a mixed bag... However, even in the cases where we missed (i.e. Mike Williams), it wasn't as if the decision at the time was a crazy one. Still, TD seemed to enjoy the drama of draft day. In fact, he made at least one trade in every draft up until last season. My suspicion is that we'll find Marv and co. to be more "boring" in their moves. Of course, sometimes boring isn't bad.

Agreed... In fact, the consensus at the time was that WM was a "safe" pick as he did not come with any questionable character issues. I think too often the problem is that these guys sign the fat contracts with the big guaranteed signing bonus -- and they feel like their goal of getting rich has been fulfilled. A guy like Big Mike will never have to work another day again in his life if he so chooses. The key is identifying which players view that big payday as the BEGINNING to a highly competetive career. That's what makes this whole thing such a crapshoot.