Brandon

It has that reputation, but is it deserved? They played 8 games against the Pac-10 this year. 6 of those teams had run defenses ranked 42nd or better, which means they were in the top third of all Division 1 teams and on average they were ranked 27th. Stanford (117) and Oregon (78), the other two games, drag the average down to 44. That's still not that bad. Lynch ran for 100 yards against four of them. The remaining two were against USC and UCLA, tied for 9th in the country against the run. Lynch posted 88 and 81 yards respectively against them, with 20 carries in each game.

I don't necessarily disagree with that. Still, I do expect the Bills to unload McGahee, whether I think its the best idea or not.

That's exactly why this scenario, while possible, is unlikely. There really isn't an incentive for the Bills to do this. Willis McGahee IS an average RB. Why go through this trouble in order to convince an average RB that he's not worth as much as he may think? If he is an average RB, he is replaceable, and in fact, the Bills would probably be looking to upgrade fairly soon anyway.

Very, very close call, but I would lean towards Lynch over Anderson. I am an Arkansas fan and have seen enough of Anderson to believe he'll be a great player, but we have too much tied into the position already. Meanwhile, I'm not sure we have much of anything at RB. I wouldn't give the CBs much consideration at all, as there are several good ones in this draft and its likely the Bills could pick up a good prospect in R2 or even R3. I consider Timmons to be a borderline 1st rounder and if the rumors of Jarrett running a 4.7 are true, I definitely don't want him at 12.

I'd also point out that the easiest way to improve your defense is to keep the opposing offense on the bench. You do that by running the ball. But yeah, you are right. The one piece of the puzzle being ignored by many is positional depth in the draft. How many top tier guys are there at each need position, and how large is the drop to the 2nd tier? Its a question that needs to be answered. You have to maximize the value of your picks. Myself, I would draft a DT or RB in R1, MLB in R2, and CB in R3. The reasoning is simple. Given the positional depth in the draft, and the historical trends of how teams value each position, you are more likely to get good prospects at each position by taking them in that order.

I dunno. If the Bills trade Willis McGahee, our only RBs would be Shaud Williams and Fred Jackson. I'd say that's a pretty glaring hole as well.

The Bills current RBs, including FBs, are: Willis McGahee Shaud Williams Fred Jackson Guys, that's not much. If McGahee is traded as expected, I'd say that's easily the biggest hole on the roster. Even if Anthony Thomas is re-signed, I'd still think the Bills would give Lynch very strong consideration, as Thomas is little more than a decent backup and spot starter.

Its a mistake. He re-signed with the Lions.

At the moment, no. They have too many needs. Assuming McGahee is on the way out the door, they've got major problems in the offensive backfield. They'd have no FB, and Josh Reed would probably be the best RB left on the roster, even though he's a WR. Ouch. RB appears to be a critical need on this team. CB, LB and DT are major potential problem areas as well, though Youboty and McCargo do give cause for some degree of optimism at CB and DT. We might also be OK at LB if Crowell can play the middle. But none of this is to say they don't need major help at these three positions. Down the list, WR and TE also give me a little cause for concern. The Bills have average starters filling those positions, but on a weak offense, those guys are actually part of the problem. RG isn't any better. Still, I don't expect the Bills to do much, if anything to upgrade these this offseason. The good news is that they'll probably be competitive. Quality LBs and CBs shouldn't be too tough to find in the 2nd-4th round area. The problem will be filling the needs at RB and DT in a draft that appears to be weak at both positions outside of the top two prospects at each.

A roster almost completely devoid of starting caliber OL talent?

I think Marv is DEFINITELY looking for another Thurman Thomas type player and its a big factor in why I think he'll take Lynch. Even if he waits until a little later in the draft, I think he'll lean more towards smaller RBs like Lorenzo Booker or Kenny Irons who are explosive open field runners.

While I agree that its possible to find quality RBs later on and am not entirely opposed to it, I think they'd be better served by balancing their draft with a RB in R1 and drafting heavily on defense thereafter. If Lynch is drafted at 12, I would not be shocked to see them devote the entire remainder of their draft to the defensive side. That still allows them to do a ton of building on the defensive side while also adding an elite prospect at RB in R1.

I feel pretty strongly that they're going to draft Lynch now. These signings are clearly aimed at improving their running game and to that end, I think they'll also go out and get an elite runner to compliment those signings.

I think the Bills are finished with major acquisitions in FA. As for the draft, I would take a different approach. 1) RB Marshawn Lynch, California 2) ILB David Harris, Michigan 3) CB Fred Bennett, South Carolina 3) OG Manuel Ramirez, Texas Tech (expected pick for trading McGahee) 4) RB Dwayne Wright, Fresno State Most will immediately notice that this draft lacks a DT. I think this is a very weak year at the position and do not advocate drafting a DT just for the sake of drafting a DT. Branch and Okoye are the only two I feel would make any real impact. Given that, I would direct this draft toward maximizing all aspects of the Bills own running game. To that end, I would draft Marshawn Lynch at 12 (assuming the character issues check out; I think they will) with Ramirez as a run blocking RG prospect. Wright gives them a quality #2. Ideally, I'd like to see them sign a FA #2 RB, however. Meanwhile, Harris gives them a quality MLB prospect, while Bennett competes with Youboty, Greer and Thomas (if re-signed) for the #2 CB spot.

I didn't need to see how he ran against the Bills in week 17. I remember how well he ran as a member of this team in 2002 and 2003. I've always thought the Bills made a mistake with that whole situation.

It probably isn't backloaded. Contrary to the popular interpretation, I think Marv actually meant that the Bills would no longer heavily backload contracts in his 'cash-to-the-cap' statements. At any rate, this is a very nice signing for the Bills.

The Giants would seem to be the most likely candidate, IMO. They have needs at LB and RB. The Bills might be able to work out a package deal that sends both of them to NY for an early draft pick.

Looks to me like they just signed this year's version of Mike Gandy/Tutan Reyes/Bennie Anderson.

I'd be more concerned with his career rushing average of 3.3 yards per carry than even his 500 yards for the season. He's likely going to be drafted quite a bit higher than he probably should just because of that 40 time. That time raises more questions than it answers, IMO, and I might even downgrade him because of it. It makes you wonder how such a talented player could be so unproductive, especially in college.

There's no reason not to re-sign him. He's a restricted free agent and as such should be relatively inexpensive. At worst, he'll fill one of the 5-8 RB spots the Bills will likely need in training camp and if he fails to make the team, it won't impact the cap situation.

The only true possession receiver on the roster is Josh Reed and to be honest, I would rather have Reed than Moulds at this point in their careers. He's quite a bit faster than Moulds, he's a better runner after the catch, he always seems to be open, and while his hands are at times questionable, Moulds dropped more than his fair share in '04 and '05 as well. Four or five years ago, I would've given Moulds the edge in all of those areas, but in 2007, its not much of a contest.

I wouldn't bring him back. He'll be 34 in July and has averaged only 10 yards per catch the last two seasons. Maybe the offenses he's played in haven't helped him, but at his age, its more likely that he has lost a step or three. I think he's done and probably should have retired a season ago.

Considering how utterly pathetic this offense has been for the last four seasons, very few of those starters should consider themselves safe. I'm not entirely convinced that the Bills should unload Willis McGahee and draft a RB in R1 to replace him, but I can't blame them for considering it. He may be 'average', but that's the problem. There are too many 'average' players in starting roles on this team. Average players are backups for half the league. Average players also tend to be system players and, in fact, I think this is their primary motivation for unloading him. I think they want a more explosive open field runner with the versatility to be a top recieving threat out of the backfield. They want a Thurman Thomas. They've got an Eddie George; a capable straight-ahead runner but one who is not versatile enough to allow them to run their offense to the extent they envision. There's also another point to consider, that being McGahee's contract status. He's almost certain to leave after the '07 season, so the Bills are going to be in the market for a starting RB anyway. If that's the case, and there's a RB available at 12 this year at they really like, I see no reason why they shouldn't give strong consideration to selecting him, all things considered.

I believe that the Bills are looking for a more dangerous open field runner and reciever out of the backfield than McGahee. They might take Marshawn Lynch at 12, but I think they're more likely to pick someone such as Lorenzo Booker or Antonio Pittman in the 2nd or 3rd round.

I think this is generally what the Bills have in mind. They're probably planning on drafting a RB on the first day, anyway, so if they can pay for the pick used by trading McGahee, so much the better. In that sense, it becomes something of a player-for-player trade. Of course, finding someone who will give up a 2nd for McGahee may be a problem.