ch19079

The top 3 players drafted get paid based on where they were drafted, not by the position they play. (or at least they should). Teams try to make that arguement when signing a non-QB high draft pick. But its all bull. Teams get to select whoever they want. If they chose a OT, then they obviously felt he was more important to their organization than a QB, and should be paid based on where they were selected. The ONLY thing Long can say is that he signed a 5 year deal where Ryan signed a 6 year deal. But garenteed money is usually what its all about. I do not like how they allow teams to sign the 1st overall player before they are actually drafted. The fins had more leverage than the other teams because, if a player didnt agree to the slightly less money than normal, there is a chance he could drop 3-4 slots in the draft costing him even more millions. Your contract should not play any part of where you are drafted. Its screwed up how they have it now. and if you want to go more in to it, his agent works for the same agency as some of the other top 5 picks. After long signed the deal, he actually thanked another players agent before his own. There was definatly some shaddy things going leading up to the draft, and I hope they work it out in the new labor deal.

they cut him for missing a non-manditory camp. That alone is a violation of the league rules, but I dout anyone will do much about it. Its obvious the Bengals dont want him. He will sign with someone for a very low deal. Players with tallent are always given several chances. I do not see the harm in signing him to a league minimum contract. At worse we cut him and be out a few pennies in cap space. But there is a chance he could be a damn good backup, or even, if he proves himself, earn a starting job.

I thaught he was great comming out of college... but all that has changed now. They cut him for missing a non-mandatory camp due to a death in the family. They just wanted an excuse.

Players get cut and sign with new teams weeks later. Coaches get fired and are hired to other NFL coaching staffs weeks later. This is normal. Thats how it is and how its always been. There is nothing wrong with that. Going to extream measures to video tape, and steal, opposing coaches signals so a team can gain an advantage by knowing the exact play called on any down, is cheating. Its an embarassment to the coaches, players, fans, organizations, and to the NFL as a whole. And since that same team just happened to have their best seasons ever while this took place, everything they have done, whether it was influenced by the cheating or not, is darkened by it. The SB wins, the future Hall of Fame QB, the Future Hall of Fame Head Coach.... all of it.

We do not know what happened at that time. It all depends on the situation. Since we do not know any details about it, we can not really judge if it was right or wrong. Lets get an example. A man punches a woman, knocking her out, in the middle of the street. If you heard that, then most would assume that the man was crazy and should go to jail. We usually do not see situations where that action is justified. However, we do not know what happened in that situation. The mans actions may be justified, however unlikely. If both parties say nothing happened and all is well, how can we know what really happened? The media only reports what they hear and that is usually only a part of the story.

I watched the press conference on ESPN. This is my take. I do think that "most" of the tapes were made so they would know the signals in the next game (mostly division games). Though, I do believe that they taped just about every single game, on the off chance that they would play them again later in the season. But most of the attention had to be on division opponents and expected playoff opponents. The Commish said that Walsh had the tapes in his possession through out the game and turned them in after the game was over. (though the jets tapes were caught at half time.....) but what I do not understand is that the commish said that the patriots actions from 2001 to 2007 were illegal, and the patriots knew it was illegal, and walsh knew it was illegal. And the pats even told walsh not to get caught. But then the commish said that is was ok at that time to scout coaches and tape their signals. And that every one knew this and took steps to protect their signals, and changed them often. And based on that belief, he didnt believe that it gave the pats THAT big of an advantage. I know they changed "clerified" the rule before this last season to make it illegal to tape coaches signals for any purpose (even if it was not used during that game). And the pats still cheated in the jets game, were caught, and fined for that. Then the commish added, that the fine and loss of a draft pick were for the entire act of video taping coaches signals (dating back to 2001 based on the confession of Bellicheck). Were teams allowed to tape opposing coaches signals back in 2001? That is exactly what the tapes looked like to me. Was that illegal? He first said it was, then said it was not when trying to downplay their advantage.

I see McGee and Parrish keeping their special team spots. But I think McKelvin will be used like J. Leonard was last season. He will come in if parrish or McGee cant play for whatever reason. And probubly be the other deep man on kickoffs.

I thaught the loss of a 1st rounder was for the pats cheating in the jets game last season. Then they confessed to cheating since 2000. but they then said that the loss of a 1st rounder was for doing that also. So the pats cheat for 8 years strait and win several SBs and lose 1 1st rounder, (when they had a second 1st rounder.... a !@#$in 7th overall) that same year). but if another team tries to do the same in the future, they will be penalize in a similar fassion for their first offense? That makes no sence to me.

trade away a 4th rounder for a player that cant even play NFL football right now..... somehow I do not think this is a good idea.

in the first round: QB, RB, SS, MLB, O-Line.... I would add CB, but it wouldnt be THAT horrable...

consitering what Chad has been doing and saying agenst his current team, there is no reason to think it wont happen with his new team in 2-3 years when he demands to be one of the top 5 paid players in the NFL. However, I would not use Fitz's deal to compare reasonable market value. Fit's situation was unique. Also, Fitz is a great young tallent with great character.

I dont want a CB in the 1st round. The bills have shown they will not pay to keep a quality CB in buffalo. However, if we do take a CB at #11, then we have to trade back up into the 2nd round and take a WR (any WR not named Kelly or Manningham). If we do this, we will lose out on drafting a TE with the potential to start this season.

I want the bills to draft a TE in the 2nd round. IF they can trade that 2nd rounder for Shockey, then im all for it. Though the Giants would be insaine to first let him go, and then again to let him go for anything less than a mid 1st round pick.

2. WR and TE as long as we take a WR in the 1st and a TE in the second.

It wont happen. Not after we just signed a nice OLB in FA. Though, Urlacher definatly deserves a long extention.

because as of right now, he can not play football. Would you trade a 4th rounder for a soda? At least you could drink the soda.

Matt Ryan is supposed to be the #2 overall, regardless of position, player in this years draft.... are they insaine? Gholston over Chris Long?? I didnt even bother looking at the rest of the list...

he ran a slow 40. That doesnt mean much to me. Im more interested in his game speed. His game film from college should be more important. However, saying he ran a slow 40 because they made him run on the same turff that everyone else ran on at the combine makes him look childish.

the girls were not underage, he was not doing any illegal drug, he was not shooting people in night clubs, he didnt get arrested... what exactly are they up set with? the fact that he isnt reading his playbook 24 hours a day? This is nothing.

it may be blunt, but it seems to be true.

The jets dont have a QB or RB, or much of anything. If the jets get any better, it wont last long, and wont be enough to get to .500. The fins do have the tuna, but still lack tallent at many positions. They wont be any good for at least 3-4 years. The bills will probubly come in 2nd in our division again, but may have a shot at a wildcard game. The pats are the pats, and unless some hero steps up and breaks Brady in half, then they will probubly win 12+ games next year.

I answered 7 of the 9 questions in time, and got 6 right. I missed the boy/football question. I hate those kinds of questions. I never take to time to clearly read them before answering. And now I feel dumb because I had to read a few questions a few times. reading comprehention is not a strong point for me. I understood what the "number of hours in september" one was asking me for, but time expired right before I answered.

He is one of the few (probubly only) player I dont mind missing the off season training. He can do what he wants.

many say that a WR will be taken at #11 because at that point the bills will be able to select the best WR in this years draft class (because none will be selected higher than 11). Also, the bills biggest need this offseason is a starting WR, which just happens to be the one position not taken care of in FA. I do not see the bills signing a WR in the 2nd round capable of staring his rookie year. The bills need TE, DE, and CBs, but those needs are not nearly as desperate as the WR position. IMO, the bills will try to trade down a few spots and still pick up a starting WR. If they cant trade down I expect them to just pick the best WR available. And even that can be debated forever since noone can decide who the best WR prospect in this year. The bills, like many NFL teams, have needs at more than one position, which they are hoping to fill in the draft. Its just unfortunate that the bills are in the position (again) where they have to take the best player available at a position no matter where he is slotted to go.

I do see your point about our need for a #2 WR as opposed to a #1, but do you really want to see Reed lined up outside opposite Evans? I sure as hell dont. He is just not that type of WR. And yes, we dont need a #1 WR, but we do need 2 WRs that can actually start in the basic 2 WR formation. The bills have not used the TE much at all. He was usually kept in to block and really only used as a last resort. But The TE position has been developing in the NFL. Now teams are starting to use that position more and realize that they can create more mismatches agenst LBs. The bills NEED a TE. Most of the good ones (capable of starting) will be available in the 2nd round. CB is not a big priority IMO. I would like to see a true #1 CB, but not for the huge contract amounts that i have seen recently. Greer has developed into a good CB. McGee is... good enough. but we still need depth, and maybe one of those depth guys will turn out to be a solid starter. The bills have recently signed old average players to 1-2 year deals basically puting a bandaid on our CB problems (just like last year...) So i can definatly see them taking a CB in the 3rd, using him as depth and hoping he developed into a true (cheap) starter. As for DE. We do need much more pressure on the QB. But I think that if we actually stop the run, the offense will throw more and actually give us a chance to get sacks. Every game last year, it seemed like every run agenst our D went for either negative yards or 8 yards (a lot more went for 8 yards). Yes the Bills need a DE opposite Shobel, but the DEs we have are "good enough" to, at least in my opinion, push the need for a DE below the need for a WR in the 1st. ANd I also dont think the bills will take a DE in the 2nd round. The drop off in tallent at the DE position from the #11 spot to the #42 spot is HUGE. I dout the bills will find a DE capable of starting at the #42 spot. While I do think they can find a TE capable of starting at that same spot.