Dawgg

He needs to develop into a Troy Polamalu / Roy Williams type player to be worthy of a top-10 pick. Antoine Winfield-level production, which is very good in and of itself, would NOT be enough to consider this a successful pick.

http://www.billszone.com/mtlog/archives/20...ned_koolaid.php Sorry if this has been posted.

This is precisely why the Bills won a lot of games under the Wade Phillips era. He was the first (and last) Bills coach to stress first and foremost stopping the run on the defensive side of the ball and for the most part, that's what the Bills did. During those playoff years, they were among the NFL elete in rushing and stopping the rush.

Let's go at this again. Your points and my rebuttals follow: 1. TV led the team in INTs and FRs. He was tied for the lead for INTs with 4 and had 2 fumble recoveries. Not exactly scintillating stats, especially considering the bulk of those came in one game and the D was among the league's worst. Half of his INTs came in the season opener against the lowly Texans. What doesn't show up in the stats is missed tackles. There were numerous opportunities in which he was just flat out beat... considering most opposing receivers made a living running around in the Bills' secondary, 66 tackles is rather low. 2a. His value as a teacher Make him a coach but there's no reason to carry him on the roster. At the VERY best, he can be a second-string player... but that's an awfully expensive for a reserve. 2b. Ralph wants to win now Really??? Judging by the moves made this season does it seem to you like the team is planning to make a Super Bowl push in the next 2 years? 3. TV's union presidency having an effect on the decision to keep him I think this is really stretching it. TV's role in the union has no effect on the Bills. His job is to look out for the players, not franchises. He has been fairly clear about that in his interviews. In fact, he views all the OTAs as a burden and thinks that NFL players are worked far too hard by their employers (a pitty indeed). 4. Switch to Cover 2 plays to his srengths This is your best argument. It all boils down to this -- would you rather have your starter in waiting learn the system by taking his lumps in his first year so that he can be a key performer for years to come OR would you rather have an aging past his prime safety man the position for a year? Personally, I'd rather groom Ko Simpson ASAP -- he was drafted by this regime because they felt he can fit into this system. He is younger and more athletic. I say let him learn.

in the short-term. In the long-term, letting Ko Simpson go out and play would be the best IMO.

Exactly. Vincent is a stand-up guy, great player ONCE UPON A TIME. If this is truly a youth movement in Buffalo (and it appears to be that way), Troy Vincent should stay on the roster as a backup/coach at best.

R. Rich -- I too am a longtime poster, having been here since 1997. With that being said, I will turn the tables a little bit. People who have a strong opinion are villified on this board. If someone questions Willis' committment to the team (which isn't exactly an unreasonable question), all of a sudden they are labeled as anti-Bills or overly harsh. While there are plenty of posters who take that my way or the highway attitude, there are plenty of old timers who do the very same thing. Posts that paint a sunny, optimistic picture are labeled as "great posts" while posters that paint a gloomy picture are labeled as trolls. In short, I think it's a 2 way street.

Seriously... this holier than thou act has gotten way old. In any case, if TV is such a great teacher, MAKE HIM A COACH. He's well past his prime and I'd much rather take my lumps with Ko Simpson out there.

The Bills spent a combined $20 million on 2 players who have vastly underachieved the past 2 seaasons: Peerless Price and Josh Reed. While I can somewhat fathom the Reed signing, given that he is a solid blocker and was somewhat productive, the signing of Price to ANYTHING but a minimum contract is just plain stupid. The guy was a preseason cut from the Falcons (and it was a football-related cut, not cap), he couldn't get on the active roster in Dallas where Bledsoe was the very QB who helped him hit career numbers, and most importantly, this team doesn't need a player like him. The roster is filled with solid, young recivers in Evans, Parrish, Reed, Aiken and F. Smith -- what value does he add to this squad? Not much, given what's already in place. Now suppose you use that money to bolster your chances at Ryan Pickett by giving him a better offer. All of a sudden, the defensive line recovers from the loss of Sam Adams and the team isn't forced to trade back into the first round of the draft. Your entire point centers around the fact that the Bills, unlike New England need to overpay for free agents. That, I agree with. However, it is also important to overpay for the "right" free agents -- Peerless Price was anything but that.

If all 53 players on the team show the dedication and work ethic of Fletcher, we'd be in good shape... if only....

... becuase it was mandatory.

Yes the Pats showed some interest in Price and valued him at a veteran minimum contract. The Bills showed some interest in Price and valued him at a $10 Million, 4-year contract. Whose judgement do you trust?

I don't think it's purely about you. There are plenty of posters who seem to be willing to trash Moulds based on one incident and then use his apparent lack of production to bolster their point. Those same people, when confronted with Price's lack of production over the years, make excuses for it and rationalize why he'll be a #2 receiver for the Bills. Maybe you're not doing that but the fact remains -- it's not fair. Peerless Price was cut by Bill Parcells mid-season -- and while he was on the roster, he suited up for one game. That's enough data to tell me that you don't go anywhere near this guy, let alone for a 4 year deal. These are the types of signings that set teams backwards. New England signs veterans who were cut by their former teams as well -- but the difference is that these vets were productive RECENTLY. The last time Price was productive, Gregg Williams was the coach. It's a risk, but not one this team should be taking.

I hope you're right but I tend to doubt it. He is simply not ready to be a #1 receiver.

Stop making sense! The general modus operandum around here is to trash any player that leaves the team and talk up any player that is on the team, irrespective of what reality has in store.

Yes, I was probably being harsh, you're right. With that being said, I just don't understand the way in which this team spent its money. You get rid of Moulds because he has a big cap hit but then you sign Price and Reed to a combined $20 million over 4 years to go along with another high draft pick Roscoe Parrish. I would much rather combine the salary given to Price and Reed and get a proven vet like Keyshawn Johnson or David Givens. Price, in my opinion is not what this team needs. He's another burner who can beat you deep -- last I checked, that was the same description given to Evans and Parrish.

Mularkey essentially aliented his entire team by suspending Moulds -- not a very smart move when you are a rookie head coach. Don't blame this on Moulds' silence, he brought it upon himself. The bottom line is that not all players are treated equally. If Freddie Smith pulled that maneuver, you suspend and bench him. Moulds, on the other hand, had too good a history and too much seniority to be treated that way. Despite that fact, Moulds kept his mouth shut and returned to work. He was not being used properly and the blame for that falls sqarely on the coaches. You look at a player like Rod Smith who puts up numbers year in and year out on the wrong side of 30 and you realize how critical it is to have a coaching staff that knows how to utilize the weapons on the roster. As for the "Mort Report," his rendition of the story was embellished... talking about listening to music in the locker room and not paying any attention to what the coaches said. From what i heard, that was completely false. All this was a reaction to a heated argument between Moulds, MM and Graves on the sideline.

Mort's facts are wrong and any reporting he does related to the Bills is slanted heavilly in favor of Donahoe -- and you know how that works. The fact of the matter (and I did have some info from someone ON the team) was that the Moulds incident was the culmination of a series of events and he just lost his cool during the Miami game. He was being used as a decoy, which is fine with him if the team is winning -- but with the team losing, he was getting frustrated. In 2002, Moulds VOLUNTEERED to play decoy to open things up for Peerless and specifically told coaches to look the other way. At the time, the team was winning. It was quite the contrary under Mularkey's inept offense with poor blocking, gimmick plays and subpar QB play. Both during and after the suspension, Moulds never took his concerns to the public. He accepted it like man and came back and played hard the rest of the way. Sure he made a mistake and he knows that -- but he had every right to be frustrated because he was not used properly in that offense.

Exactly. But don't let that confuse those who will do whatever it takes to bash one of our more productive players last year. These same people laud the Bills for signing a worthless schmuck like Peerless Price at 4 years and $10 million. The Patriots offered him the vet minimum... which value system do you trust more: The Patriots or the Bills? Case closed.

Pardon me being rude, but you simply don't know what you are talking about in this case.

Anything to justify trading Moulds... even if it means fabricating the truth.

Spoken like a true homer. You have no idea on the context! This was PRACTICE. Perhaps they were running a 4th down and short yardage play, in which case you catch the ball and protect it without risking a fumble. Moulds was overpriced for this team but so is Peerless Price. I'd take Moulds over Price any day of the week.

In order for those WRs to thrive, a dominant, pass-blocking offensive line is a virtual must. Teams that run wide open offenses - St. Louis, Indianpolis, Denver all boast offensive lines that are in the upper echelon in the league. Moreover, I think there's something to be said about drafting offensive linemen and bringing them into the systetm at an early stage in their career.

Edge is a proven vet. Willis is far from it.

shhh... don't tell Badol