Dan

OK.. let's put this to rest once and for all please. Trent does not spread the ball around more than JP. You may think he does. You may want him to. But, the facts are... he does not. So please, lets stop just creating imaginary notions to convince us that JP blows. The numbers are detailed below. (disclaimer: I hate math, so please feel free to make sure I added properly. The stats are copy/pasted so they're accurate as listed on nfl.com, but the summary at the end I added up.) According to the numbers, its quote clear - both QB's spread the ball around remarkably similar. Yes, Trent completed slightly more passes to the TEs; however, JP completed slightly more passes to the RBs. So, if you combine them into a single category (TE/RB), the numbers are very similar. Furthermore, in comparison, to all WRs vs Evans, both QBs favored Evans on roughly 1/5 of their completions and the other WRs on about 36% of their completions. So, please, let's discard the erroneous notion that JP only throws long passes to Evans. He clearly completed just about as many passes to TEs, RBs and WRs not named Lee Evans as did Trent. Perhaps Trent looks better throwing 43.7% of his completions to the TEs/RBs than JP while he's completing 42.3% of passes. I don't know. But, they both spread the ball around quite well and in similar fashion. ========================== per nfl.com wk 1 (JP) Rec. Yds J. Reed 4 37 R. Parrish 2 25 R. Royal 1 12 M. Lynch 2 9 A. Thomas 1 8 L. Evans 2 5 K. Everett 1 3 P. Price 1 -2 ------------------------------ wk2 (JP) R. Parrish 6 56 P. Price 3 33 M. Lynch 1 21 L. Evans 2 17 M. Gaines 1 14 R. Neufeld 1 8 R. Royal 1 5 ------------------------------ wk3 (TE) R. Parrish 2 27 J. Reed 2 27 P. Price 2 23 L. Evans 1 7 M. Lynch 1 2 (JP 1 4) R. Neufeld 1 6 M. Gaines 1 5 ------------------------------ wk 4 (TE) L. Evans 6 72 J. Reed 4 64 R. Parrish 4 33 R. Royal 3 31 M. Gaines 4 20 P. Price 1 14 ------------------------------ wk 5 (TE) R. Parrish 6 37 J. Reed 5 35 R. Royal 4 34 M. Lynch 2 32 A. Thomas 2 16 L. Evans 1 12 M. Gaines 2 6 D. Wright 1 4 ------------------------------ wk 7 (TE) L. Evans 5 98 J. Reed 1 25 M. Lynch 3 14 R. Parrish 1 9 M. Gaines 1 7 ------------------------------ wk 8 (TE/JP) L. Evans 3 36 (JP 2 102) J. Reed 4 40 R. Royal 2 19 R. Parrish 1 12 M. Gaines 1 11 D. Schouman 1 9 (JP) D. Wright 1 8 M. Lynch 1 7 F. Jackson 1 -1 ------------------------------ wk 9 (JP) L. Evans 9 165 J. Reed 6 55 R. Royal 2 35 M. Gaines 3 22 A. Thomas 1 11 D. Schouman 2 10 M. Lynch 1 7 R. Parrish 1 -2 ------------------------------ wk 10 (JP) L. Evans 4 65 J. Reed 3 40 M. Gaines 2 28 M. Lynch 3 24 ------------------------------ wk 11 (JP) R. Parrish 1 47 J. Reed 3 44 L. Evans 4 40 An. Thomas 3 15 M. Gaines 1 13 F. Jackson 2 9 D. Wright 1 5 ------------------------------ wk 12 (JP) J. Reed 6 50 F. Jackson 5 47 An. Thomas 8 45 R. Parrish 4 26 L. Evans 2 19 M. Gaines 1 19 R. Royal 1 5 ------------------------------ wk 13 (TE) F. Jackson 4 69 J. Reed 5 67 L. Evans 4 51 R. Parrish 4 36 R. Royal 4 21 M. Gaines 1 13 ------------------------------ wk 14 (TE) L. Evans 2 79 R. Royal 3 46 J. Reed 3 30 F. Jackson 1 6 M. Gaines 1 3 R. Parrish 1 1 ------------------------------ wk 15 (TE) L. Evans 4 36 F. Jackson 3 36 J. Reed 3 29 M. Gaines 2 14 R. Royal 1 9 ------------------------------ wk 16 (TE) L. Evans 3 43 M. Lynch 2 42 R. Parrish 1 42 M. Gaines 2 23 J. Reed 1 11 ------------------------------ wk 17 (TE) R. Royal 3 31 F. Jackson 6 24 J. Reed 1 24 M. Lynch 1 22 M. Gaines 2 17 S. Aiken 1 10 R. Parrish 1 3 L. Evans 1 2 ------------------------------ ------------------------------ JP Losman (111 completions): TEs -18 (16.2%) RBs -29 (26.1%) TE/RB -47 (42.3%) WRs (other than Evans) -40 (36.0%) Evans - 24 (21.6%) T. Edwards (151 completions): TEs -37 (24.5%) RBs -29 (19.2%) TE/RB -66 (43.7%) WRs (other than Evans) -55 (36.4%) Evans -30 (19.9%)

With a rare combination of size and speed, this guy could really be the high motor pick we're looking for. He's a little old, but on the positive side, we could sign him to a 5 year contract and he'd retire a Bill. So, no more letting guys go after their first contract is up.

A little too tall for my tastes. Got anyone shorter?

Completely agree. I'm not sure I could ever leave this place, but it would definitely make me wish that my fears that the world is ending in 2012 were true. But this site, is by far, the best - not only in terms of content but simultaneously in terms of appearance.

Sorry, didn't know what else to call them. But, I'm referring to the bar at the top of TBD that has "The Latest Buffalo Bills News" in it. The bars that have the dates (i.e. April 29, 2008) in them. The ones in the left and right columns "Discuss the Bills!", "2008 Team Info", etc. Might could replace some of those with a simple pic that would give more design options for the text. But now I'm getting too crazy perhaps. (Actually they're probably table cells, but they look like bars due to the design.)

Well, I'll go on record as saying the front page (TBD) and the board (TSW) look good to me. Again, this is where I come to get information and news about the Bills and then to talk about that with other Bills' fans (and a few idiots). So, I prefer the simple, straight forward design. Of course, you're right, there's always room for improvement. And most of the times you don't realize how much so until you actually see the improvements. So, I would never say change is bad. But, I do think change just for the sake of change isn't always a good thing - especially if you start getting away from the primary intent of the site. A few things for consideration, if I were pushed to come up with some: 1. Sure the banner could be updated/changed. That would be fairly easy and give a new look. 2. Striped background on TBD could be a solid background. But, again, that just simplifies and cleans things up in my mind. 3. Links at the top of TBD (Home :: Stadium Wall :: History :: Trading Post :: Tailgate Central :: Football Pool :: Bills Daily) could be worked into the graphic. That would make them look more polished and less old school. 4. Update the color of the header bars. No neons, but just new "bills-themed" tones. 5. I wouldn't change the overall layout at all. IMO, it's puts the maximum amount of information right there in front of you, with minimal scrolling 6. Make a link to bb.com more prominent (in the banner?). Possibly on the right column a link to the multimedia section, updated as they add new videos (similar to the news sites). but, I admit I have no idea how you get all those newspaper sites listed so quickly, so maybe too much of a hassle. That's the one thing really missing at this point. Video's have become much more commonplace, so more links to video content. But, again, that may bring a whole range of problems I don't know about. 7. As far as TSW, other than similar banner change and color of header bars, I agree, I wouldn't change a thing. OK. So guys and gals don't PAM me. I'm just offering ideas.

I agree with you... and with Dibs. I like the clean. uncluttered look. But, yes, that is my preference. Too many sites lose focus. I come here to read and converse about the Bills, not look at stimulating artwork and colors. I like a site that is clean, easy to navigate, and true to its intent. That's exactly what we have here.

Now Waddle ends the show by saying the Bills are the most improved team since the end of the season. What's this?!? Is it possible the Bills will start getting some love from the national media? Is it possible the Bills FO has made some good moves? Oh man, we are so screwed this year.

Hamdan Rocks!

That's how I see it. We let one player walk. He didn't want to be here anyway. And in return got 3 guys that solidified our line. I don't care how you slice it that's a good trade. I do agree with Bill though. The line is by no means set. We need to upgrade at least one position and get some depth. But, the Oline is far from the most pathetic unit on the team. And that's basically the result of letting Clements walk. Hopefully, the line is held together this year, continiues to improve, and we can start getting some depth guys in next year.

So much for flying under the radar! NFLN TA guy, just called us a sleeping giant! We're the team to watch. We're going to be healthy. Lots of good players. Good draft. We're going to be a young team on the rise. We're definitely doomed.

yes By all accounts, this guy is being billed as the next Devon Hester. Is he? I don't know, but we have to find out.

This is a good question. And for me, I think it's its a no brainer. Let Clements walk and spend that money on the line. We absolutely needed help on the line and no way you spend that much on a CB and hope you can draft OL.

yes

For me... yes. A player drafted that high should be expected to make the probowl at least a few times in their career. However, I think you can't expect the probowl for at least 3-4 years. Firstly, because it takes several years for most players to develop and become dominating-type players. Secondly, it takes several good years for a player to get the league-wide recognition and be selected to the probowl. So, should he make it? Yes. Should he make it in the next 3 years. No. I think you have to look at this pick in a few ways though. First of all, you clearly think we should have drafted a lineman. Myself, and many others, would agree with that. However, I think we have to consider the possibility that the coaches and FO staff disagree with that. We see Fowler as a liability. Perhaps the FO doesn't. We see guard as an area of upgrade; we see the lack of depth as being a problem. Again, the front office must disagree. Certainly, if they saw the line as an area in need of help they could have drafted for that. And I'm not talking about with pick 11 or even 41. There were plenty of decent linemen on the boards in the later rounds, yet they steadily passed them by. So, my only logical conclusion is that the coaches and FO see the state of our lines differently than we do. Are they right? I don't know. But, I'm certain we'll find out by mid-season. If they're right and the line is creating holes and pass protecting well (regardless of who's in there), then this pick will look alot better. If Trent is rushed and Lynch is fighting to reach the LOS, then this pick will look like a bust, regardless of Mclovin's play. IMO. I think another way you can look at this pick is one of value. They looked at the players and many had McLovin rated in the top 10. So, if a top 10 pick slides to you - do you take him? Add to that the CB is/was a position of (marginal at least) need. And I think they felt they had to select him. If McLovin is off the board, would they have selected a CB? That's perhaps a more important question. Finally, I'll add.. Lori put up some numbers yesterday along the line of 11 starters in the secondary last season, 4 of which are no longer on the team. Just looking at that at face value, CB definitely seems like a much higher need position that OL. So, if you have a highly touted CB and a very good OL guy (Albert) on the board, wo do you pick? The guy that will likely be a starter by the end of the season or a guy that will be a backup? (Again, assuming that they like our line and have no intention of moving a new starter in.) Well, that's all I got as far as trying to justify this pick. My initial reaction was one of uuugh. Similar to the Whitner pick. Although, if he can solidify a spot as well as Whitner has (because like it or not, Whitner has solidified our safety postion) and the line continues to progress as it did last season, then it'll all be water under the bridge. So, we just have to be patient and see if the FO's plan works. But, IMO, they don't have long - one more season. No playoffs this year and heads should role.

Exactly.... different people have different motivations. For some it may be competition with a friend. For others, the drive to be in the HOF. For some it's just plain old money. The key is finding out what motivates the guy and using it. If it's money for this guy... no problem give him an incentive laden contract and gladly hand over the cash when he puts Brady's head on stake and delivers it to you.

Well seeing as how the Chiefs were all about saying they expected 6 starters; I'd say a team gets out of a draft what they want (for the most part). And yes, they may have tried to trade up and/or down and couldn't. However, I would think that if they wanted to move up a few spots sinto the high second or mid second, they could have. Plenty of teams moved around with fairly reasonable offers - why couldn't the Bills if they wanted to? My guess is they didn't because they didn't want to. Really, do you think they don't know Fowler blows? do you think they don't know they could vastly improve at TE? That's exactly what I'm suggesting. Just because you or I think they blow, that doesn't mean that Jauron does. I would rather that they waited until next year to fill a position with a top pick or in free agency than waste picks on marginal players that aren't any better than the guys they already have. I agree.

When was the last time there was pre-season hype about the Bills outside the city of Buffalo?

Under the title of... FWIW... NFLN TA just ended with a quick segment..who's under the radar and had a good draft. Tom Waddle selected the Bills. Said we made alot of good moves and got some great talent.

They have all the pundits talking about them and saying how great they did. And, come on, isn't that really what's important.

OK.. not sure why.. but this was funny as sh--.

I think you've hit on something here. We could trade our best 2 players each year and get some great draft picks. That way we could win the draft every year!

Agree 100%. I'm still very optimistic for the season, but then again, I'm always optimistic about the Bills.

No. But that's my point. If the Bills' brass really thought we needed one, they could have traded up and gotten one. In the past 2 drafts they've traded back up to get players. This year they seemed content to get those situational/depth kind of guys. That's my point. Many think we needed a stud TE or a new C, apparently, Brandon doesn't.

Must say.... that was one hell of a highlight video. Very well-done. I think we just got the steal of the draft.