2003Contenders

For one thing, #22 is a bit high for Mangold. You can usually find quality interior linemen in the second and third round. If we are going to take an OL in the first round, we'd be better served at OT with someone like Winston Justice, Eric Winston, who could both be gone by #22. Even Marcus McNeil, who opened a lot of holes for Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams at Auburn, wouldn't be a bad selection. Of course, with this extra pick -- and knowing that we have 3 additional Day 1 picks -- I wouldn't be opposed to looking for more help in the secondary or at DE, depending on who is there.

With the recent signing of Fowler, coupled with the selection of Duke Preston last season, I doubt that Marv would be inclined to draft Mangold. But I like your idea of pairing Moulds with our #8 to move down and take Denver's two first rounders.

Actually, you probably could not ask for a better pairing for TO than Drew. Despite all of Bledsoe's shortcomings, which we all know too well, Drew is a very stand-up and secure guy. He's not likely to get his "feelings hurt" if/when TO mouths off. Also, his years of success in the league and ability to throw the football should be enough to keep TO quiet in the first place. I also think that Drew is the kind of guy that will approach TO after an altercation and say "My bad" -- even when it really may have been TO's fault. And if TO can't get along with Drew, then he won't ever get along with anybody...

My guess is that when it's all said and done, we'll find that he signed in the same $1M per year range that we've been signing most of the 2nd tier guys that we've brought in -- and that the contract is back-loaded with a minimal signing bonus.

I seem to remember that there was a major argument between Marv and Butler over Moulds versus McElroy back in 1996. Does anyone remember which side of the argument that Marv was on? My recollection is that Kelly begged for a WR. That would mean that either... 1. Kelly went over Marv's head to side with Butler or... 2. Kelly joined forces with Marv to hammer it home to convince Butler to yield. Does anyone remember? I know it was just one situation, but it would give a good example of where either Marv was dead on (for wanting Moulds) or dead wrong (for wanting McElroy).

As I mentioned in another post, while the signing of Nall may not be a vote of confidence for JP -- at the very least it (along with Marv's associated comments about the signing) likely means that JP will at least be with the club on opening day. That is to say that a first round draft pick in April would have almost certainly signaled the end of JP in Buffalo. By signing a career backup to a contract with a signing bonus big enough to assure that he is not camp fodder, the team has taken the first round draft option off the table. (Marv also said as much after the Nall signing.) Thus, JP will be here at least through 2006, so I believe that rumors of his departure are bogus. If Nall is what I expect, then he will give JP quality competition without being a genuine threat to him. Of course, if Nall is better than I expect, well, that can't be all bad either.

Considering that he managed to do a decent job protecting the not-so-nimble Brad Johnson last season, I have optimistic feelings.

I haven't looked at one of those draft value charts lately, but moving from 8 down to 15 would probably only net us Denver's 2nd round pick, rather than their other first rounder.

My guess is that if Eric was an official "holdout", then the team could deny him his roster bonus and any base salary he has coming. Also someone said above, the Bills then would only be on the hook for this year's portion of his signing bonus. The sketchy part is the roster bonus -- and whether or not the Bills really can keep that from him if he refuses to show up. I agree that this may just be a ploy, but if Eric is serious about never wanting to play for the Bills again and the Bills cannot get a decent draft pick for him, then I think this is the route that the team should take -- as it would be the most cost effective in relation to the cap. And in my book, if he flat out does not want to play for us, then I do not believe there would a good reason to accomodate EM -- and another team for that matter. Cutting him prior to June 1 would force the remainder of his signing bonus to escalate against this year's cap. For that matter, the same thing would happen if we traded him, so we had better get a decent Day 1 draft pick if we are expected to eat that kind of cap hit for a player not even with the team.

Wouldn't it be funny if Eric discovered that the market for a 30+ possession receiver, whose barely averaged 10 yards per catch in recent years is not what he thought it would be? And then he decided to return to the Bills and take the paycut that Marv originally presented, since it turned out to be his best option after all?

I think often there is a misconception about the term "2-down" player. It does not usually mean that the DT lacks the stamina to play 3 downs. It normally means that the player is well suited as a run stuffer -- and likley to be replaced by a pass rusher on obvious passing downs.

Also, not to rain on anyone's parade, but those 1999 Rams played in a dreadful NFC West and didn't have to face the Pats and Dolphins twice each. Even so, I'd like to keep faith alive too, as the Pats are on the downside -- and we SHOULD have beat the Dolphins twice last year.

You are making my point for me. Namely, Marvin Lewis decided to stay the course and did not panic, when the Bengals started out 2-5 under Palmer. Maybe if Kitna had started those first few games, the Bengals would have had a better record, and maybe they would have even made the playoffs. However, in the long run, Lewis believed that it was for the betterment of the franchise for Palmer to take his lumps as part of the learning process. I doubt that there were many calling for Kitna to start last season. Conversely, MM jumped ship when the Bills were 1-3 with JP -- and, even worse, at the end of the season, when there was nothing to play for, MM refused to let JP gain any additional development experience. Regarding the decision to hand JP the job in the first place, remember also that the Bills' situation was unique in that the team had just cut a proven starter in Bledsoe -- and the team was coming off a 9-7 season. Rightly or wrongly, the perception last year was that the team was playoff-ready with Bledsoe in tow. The Bengals situation differs in that the perception of the Bengals team was that they were an up and coming group -- and the switch to Palmer was an inevitable part of that process. Also, although Kitna was coming off a very strong season, when the reins were handed to Palmer, well... this was Jon Kitna who lost his job, not Drew Bledsoe, who ranks among all timers in career stats. As subtle as it may seem, the decision to CUT Bledsoe, rather than to just demote him (as was the case with Kitna) likely created any even bigger raucus for JP to overcome. Don't get me worng I have my reservations about JP that go above and beyond the lousy situation MM placed him in last season. For one thing, I seriously question his leadership abilities and whether or not he has that "it" factor. Jeff George was one of the most talented QBs to ever throw the football, but he was a failure because he felt that "leadership was overrated." Again, I draw upon the Moulds situation as a greater symptom of this dysfunctionality. Maybe it wouldn't have been such a bad thing if JP had grabbed him by the throat and told him to shut up...

I think the open battle for the starting QB job is the best thing that could have happened to JP -- and the team. Although I am not endorsing JP, there are a number of valid points to bring up about what went dreadfully wrong last season... 1. Simply handing the unproven JP the starting job without at least a semblance of a fair competition was a very foolish thing to do. He lost out on having the chance to COMPETE to EARN the starting job -- and TD/MM likely created some unnecessary locker-room friction. That is, we know that a number of veterans were unhappy that the job was "handed" to JP. 2. While the decision to move toward Holcomb after 4 starts may have been worthwhile, as the season was still salvageable -- it always struck me as asinine that the coaches' offensive philosophy changed. Perhaps part of that philosophy was a result of Holcomb's dink-and-dunk style as opposed to JP's gunslinger approach. But it is also fair to say that the team was more dedicated to the running game, when Holcomb was in there. In fact, the offense looked its sharpest in weeks 5 and 6 -- at home against the Dolphins and Jets -- when there actually appeared to be a rhyme or reason to the play calling. Of course, like virtually every other game last year, the offensive production was primarily relegated to the first half, as the coaches failed to make proper halftime adjustments (but that's for a different thread). Throughout the season, there never seemed to be a real rhythm or gameplan offensively, when JP was behind center. It was almost as if you could imagine MM telling the young QB, "OK, JP, go make some plays!" 3. MM may prove to be a fine coach one day, but during his time in Buffalo, especially in his final year, he just never seemed to push the right buttons. For me, JP's season was effectively lost in what was ironically his finest game as a passer. We all remember that infamous goal-line interception that proved to be the turning point in a game that originally looked to be a route. The INT started a crazy chain of event above and beyond ultimately losing that game. -- The kid was clearly down on himself after the INT. The coaches made no attempt to give him the standard, "Hang in there!" pep talk. While JP deserves blame for having thrown the ball -- I think MM deserves even more blame for having called such a play in a first-and-goal from inside the 5 yard line situation, when the team was leading by 3 TDs. -- MM showed little confidence in his young QB by pretty much asking him to sit on his hands for the remainder of that game. -- JP was denied the experience of having a true "breakout game", as the bad taste left by the INT and lack of action in the 2nd half of the game outweighed the great peformance in the first half. -- Then, of course, there was the Moulds situation as it related to that game. While that may seem unrelated to the discussion at hand, it is yet another symptom of the underlying friction that Moulds was likely causing behind the scenes as it related to JP being the starter. Recall that Moulds wound up being suspended for the next game -- a blowout loss against New England -- prior to being reinstated. By the way, Holcomb was named starter for the first game of Moulds' return. 4. In going back to Holcomb for those final games, MM essentially gave up on JP's progress and further castrated him in his teammates eyes. If JP has any shot at ever gaining their respect, he will have to seize the QB job the old fashioned way -- by earning it. I'm sure you've all read Marv's quotes about the Nall signing by now: "I think this is a better competitive situation for J.P. . . . not to have the new savior, the new first-round savior draft choice [label] to come in. I think it tends to lead us to a more level-headed quarterback competition. It's open for all three of them." This tells me a couple of things. One, despite speculation on this board, the Bills are NOT interested in drafting one of those elite QBs coming out of college this year. So you can put the Leinert-Young-Cutler draft scenarios to rest. Also, we've already seen Holcomb's upside, which isn't significant. The offense would really be in for a world of hurt if he were to win the starting job. However, Nall adds an extra dimension in that we do not know exactly what his upside is. That is to say that he serves as the perfect competitor to JP in that it isn't simply the case of Youth/Talent Vs. Experience/Guile as it would have been with JP versus Holcomb. Indeed, Nall should provide the perfect competetive balance here of a player who is good enough to compete and to push JP to make him better -- but is unlikely to be good enough to actually win the job. Of course, if Nall is indeed good enough to win the job, then it makes his signing an even smarter one.

It's still theirs -- for the time being. We heard all along that they wanted to move up in the first round. The question is: Was the move to 15 sufficient? Or are they eyeing an even higher pick -- and this move to get into the top 20 was just to better position them to move further into the top 10?

Note also that the Redskins really do not even need to save much cap room for the draft, since they've traded almost all of their picks away.

Which may add some credence to the suggestion yesterday that Holcomb was the odd man out.

Did Neal come in before or AFTER the Bills presented Wells with his offer sheet?

I find this JP compassion on both sides to be funny. And I liken it to how we fans in general behave and form various factions. There is always going to be a contingeny of fans who back every single decision that the front office makes. I remember living in DC several years ago -- and there were a number of fans that swore by Heath Shuler, even though he had never really done much of anything on the field. Then, after he left for New Orleans, these same fans said that the Redskins had no choice but to trade him because he never did anything on the field... Then there is the next contingency of fans. We all know them... They are the contrarians that are NEVER happy with anything that the team does. ("Jim Kelly sucks!") Sometimes you question whether or not the person is really even a fan at all. Then there's the rest of us that just wants the team to be the best that they can be. Sometimes we agree with the decisions made by the front office -- sometimes we do not. I'm personally ambivalent about the JP situation because I do not think he's done enough to garner the kind of blind loyalty that some fans are heaping upon him. At the same time, I have not seen enough of him to say that he is a bust either. To say that he missed most of his rookie season with a broken leg -- and was the victim of horrendous coaching and a lousy offensive line last year is not an attempt to make excuses for him. Thus, if it were up to me, I'd like to see one more year out of him, where he is at least given a halfway decent chance to succeed. With that said, I am not privvy to what goes on in the locker room to see how other players feel about him -- nor do I know how much command he has in the huddle. If Marv honestly feels that the kid does not have the "it" factor and suspects that he never will, then I am inclined to agree with their decision to move on without him, if that is what they choose to do.

I've been thinking about what we've seen out of the front office in free agency. They've only been entertaining and signing players that are -- for lack of a better word -- sleepers. That is, guys who are somewhat under the radar but potentially could be up and comers. If they take the same tact in the draft, instead of investing in a high profile prospect, I would expect them to use the #8 pick to trade down to acquire more picks -- and take some guys that may not have as much upside, but who may be less of a risk. While that should be a good way to handle this draft, there could be many of us screaming bloody murder if Marv decides to trade down with someone like Ferguson still on the clock. Of course, if that were to happen, we'd have to hope that the additional draft picks would be too lofty for him to refuse.

Considering that Willis was just a two-down player last year, maybe Morris sees a window of opportunity here.

Macaroni, the compensation is based on the tender offer that the original team makes. Based on the tender offer the original team is entitled to anything from simply Right of First Refusal up to a 1st AND 3rd round draft picks. In the Cardinals' case, they offered more than the minimum tender -- but only the next highest tender, which was just enough to net them the round in which Wells was originally drafted (6th round) as compensation.

Collins is almost certainly headed for Baltimore, where is likely to get a pretty nice paycheck.

I'm with Bill. It's not that I don't like Moulds, but his production on the field is not worth a fraction of what he's getting paid this year. I'd like to see him back -- but not with an almost $11 M cap hit, which is more than the hit that the Cowboys are taking on TO.

It also depends on what they mean by "odd man out". The consensus seems to be that Nall was promised to at least have an opportunity to compete for the starting job. The question, then, is this a 3-way competition? Assuming that it is, one of the 3 would have to wind up as the #3 QB on the depth chart. Maybe that's what Riggo meant by "odd man out" -- that Holcomb was destined to be the third string QB and that the starting job will either go to JP or Nall.