Mikie2times

I agree, and I'm sure we share the same philosophy about building a team, but I still feel like we can save Moulds. Let's just say we get him to come down to 8.5, but more importantly we sign him to a more cap friendly cut scenario for 2007. We have some space factoring in his 10 million, when you then figure in cut's we will still be in position to land some FA OL/DL. I just think if theirs anyway we can keep Moulds and still address the line with some FA's we really should try and do so. Then when next year is up we can make a better assessment on Lee, and hopefully the FA class will be filled with more proven players.

Yes, he is a prototype LE, nothing like a undersized speed rushing RE.

Very insightful use of statistics. Perhaps that could be related to Buffalo ranking 28th in yards per completion, or a rookie QB, or Kelly Holcomb’s arm strength. Somehow the solution to all this according to your logic is getting rid of the guy that accounted for 30% of your passing offense and dozens of plays in which his double coverage allowed other receivers to get open. Makes sense.

Well I'm not a captologist by any means, so if I did it wrong thanks for clearing it up. Even with that aside I still feel that releasing Moulds would really hurt us right now, perahps not PW bad but pretty close. Nobody on this board can say Lee Evans is ready to be a number one receiver. He has never been treated like one, and while I think he's a good deal better then PP I'm surprised people forget what happend to Price when he left Buffalo. Nobody in a thousand years thought he was drop out of the league bad, but since he left Buffalo and Moulds shadow that's what's happend. Then when you look at the FA market I just don't see a viable replacement. If we had a proven QB, and solid pass blocking line, (Seattle) we could get buy with one of the FA's available. But the odds of both those things playing out next year are very small, and even smaller if we let Moulds go.

What a joke, Lee Evans and Roscoe Parrish Vs HINES WARD, Randell El, Heath Miller Wow that's a tough one. Hines Ward, perennial pro bowl receiver vs 3rd year Lee Evans. I won't even get into the stats because then it just becomes a laugher. Roscoe Parrish vs Randell Ell, again what has Roscoe proven other then being a 2nd round pick? When we drafted Roscoe we wished he would become a Randell Ell type slot for crying out loud. I would compare Miller and his 6TD's to one of our TE's but we don't have any. Finally the 3rd receiver which you failed to think is of value in the NFL is Cedric Wilson, an up and comer that has already twice as proven as our #2WR according to your layout. These offensive line thread jackers need to get a clue. We get it, the lines important, but you still need quality players at other positions. Leaving our dynamic duo at QB with no targets isn't exactly a championship layout. We desperately need help at the offensive line, but Lee still hasn't proven himself, and the passing game is still to fragile to let go of Moulds without a real a proven replacement.

Who says he won't renegotiate now when he has in the past? Read the post, his renegotiated deal from last year gave him 5.5 million. A similar deal could be worked in the same range. We would then have that extra 4 million or so to help our us in free agency. Next year we review the FA crop again, if his a successor is available you deal with it then, you don't do it when the best of the WR class are no more proven then Alvin Harper or PP.

If we renegotiate Moulds to what he has renegotiated for in the past it will cost us around 5-6 million in 2006, and 5 million will come off the cap. This is according to Clumpys cap page. If we cut him outright we will lose 5 million of his salary, but take on a 5 million dollar cap hit. So basically we can choose to have Moulds and 5 million more in play money, or cut him, and have to reach in to the bank for his replacement. Not only am against the idea from a finacial stand point but also from a player standpoint. Nobody in free agency will draw attention like Moulds will, we even know his suspension was because his role was to draw double coverage! It's an indisbutable fact that we see every game, cordinators still plan for Moulds. Bad WR don't draw double coverage people. Then to think about who we would be replacing him with. A group of FA's who's best players have almost all had great system, with a great QB, and often played behind a great #1. Sure sounds like Buffalo doesnt it? It's easy to forget how important Moulds is because we rarely have seen this team without him, and he has had poor stats (sounds like PW). But think about those things real quick, and it basically amounts to nothing. What sounds more logical to you, our QB's played bad because of Eric Moulds, or Eric Moulds played bad because of our QB's? Who has the better track record EM, JP, or KH? I would say EM without question. So perhaps it was his suspension that has made people turn on him. I was also upset by this, but I also think EM doesn't mind drawing doubles all day and night if this team is in the playoff race. We've stunk forever, and he's had BAD QB's, is the frustration really that surprising? Eventually we will have to find his replacement. Why not do it another year when we have less needs, more stablity at QB/OL, and a better crop of FA to choose from?

I really don't care for TV much, just the investigation type shows on AE and Court TV. Then my girlfriend got me watching 24, and it's the best show on television. I mess around and say it's just a male soap opera, but it's still my favorite hour of TV that's not Bills football. My question is, how long is Keifer signed on for? It would take something miraculous to get Jack out of being forced into hiding again. Even if the miraculous did happen how would it be ok with the Chinese? Who knows, they probably answer it in the first 2 minutes of next episode

It also happened in the West Michigan area. Couldn't give you the details because I moved out of the area, but not only has this happened but more then once. Can you even imagine the feeling of your Neighbors finding your name clumped together with some of these sick MF?

At times it looked like Texas was running more of a sandlot offense, then the spread option, but neither style is the type you would see work in the NFL. Young could run that offense, and make it work largely because he was much more athletic then the players he faced. The problem is the NFL stopped running the single wing and option because the players are just too fast sideline to sideline. That’s why we don’t see many college QB's who dominate based on athleticism make the transition to the pro game. As you know everything in the NFL will be different. He will have people in his face, no time, and will be forced to make decisions that won't include running. You could make the Vick analogy, but Young is not as agile as Vick, or as fast. He play's with a great combination of speed and power, but I just don't see Young being able to allude defenders like Vick can in the NFL, and he won't be able to run over them like he did in college. (If he tries hello IR) In the end he would make for an intriguing pick. He certainly has all the talent in the world, but despite his godly rose bowl performance he still has a lot of question marks. Given our current situation I would just rather he answers those questions on a different team.

Rosenhaus did take huge hits with Walker and Owens, losing some credibility in the process. He's still a snake that can't be trusted, but for awhile it looked like he was going to have the NFL by the balls.

How are you arriving at these numbers? I'm assuming by this you meant his YPC was higher on average for the final 8 weeks then it was for the entire year. I have Willis down for 185 carries for 790 yards in the first 8 games, a 4.27 average. For the final 8 he had 140 carries for 457 yards, a average of 3.26. For the entire year he had 325 carries for 1247 yards for a 3.83 average. So his average actually dropped an entire yard when just comparing the first 8 and last 8, and dropped over a half yard when you compare his entire season to his final 8.

Isn't he OC or QB coach at Buffalo U?

I agree, I mean what's it say when Sherman was one of the highest profile candidates we've ever interviewed for head coach? So we can't get a Joe Gibbs out of retirement, or sign 1 million dollar coordinators, MANY teams are in the same boat. People act like were the only team that underpays its coaches. It does suck, I'm not saying it doesn't, but too many coaches have gone on to have success without massive incomes for me to blame the money. It’s a factor, but so is hiring the right guy, and drafting the right players, both of which are areas we haven’t done very well in the last few years.

I mentioned D. Byrd when I caught a USC game early in the year. He is an impressive talent, both big and athletic. A very deep TE draft class probably pushes him in the 2-3 rounds so he could be around. He did have some character issues at USC, to the extent I don't know, but he was regarded as a bit of a headache at times. With Marv here that might decrease the likelihood of us drafting great talent/poor character guys, so I still think D. Byrd as a Bill is a long shot.

So you like fat people?

Oh I agree, it's not like I'm fighting this with my last dieing breath, I just think obesity is a serious problem we need to look at. A cavalier attitude that allows this to continue could really be a problem to our health care system 10 to 20 years from now.

My problem is with the selectiveness of taxing smokers but not the obese unhealthy eaters. Wouldn't you agree they both take massive amounts out of the health care system?

Compared to eating healthy all the time McDonalds can be a very tempting alternative. That is of course a matter of opinion, but I tend to believe most people that fast food targets (Young People, African Americans) would also agree with that. In the big picture it's mostly about time, money, and marketing (part of the taste), that draw people into eating unhealthy. As you pointed out a less active lifestyle also plays a role, but I see that as more of a magnifier then a cause. Eating unhealthy cause’s people to gain weight faster then an inactive healthy eater would. Combine an inactive lifestyle with eating unhealthy and that’s when people really start to have problems. As for the tax on unhealthy food when was the last time you bought a 2Liter that was marked up 2000%, only to then be taxed between 3-10$ depending on what state you live in? That's how cigarettes get taxed. Obviously I'm not suggesting that for a 2Liter or McDonalds, but the so called tax they have right now does nothing in terms making these foods less attractive.

That's part of the problem, but I still think the article has some merit. Unhealthy foods taste the best, are the cheapest, and are the most marketed. Naturally anybody a little short on change would be more inclined to spend 4$ at McDonalds, then 15-20$ at the grocery store on healthy food like chicken breast, veggies etc. Even if the healthy food at that price has more servings it seems like the more attractive option for a lot of people to continually spend 4 or 5 $ at McDonalds, rather then pony up the extra cash. Even when people actually do go to the grocery store many buy so much pop that it completely defeats any other healthy purchases. Obviously this isn't everybody, but Americans certainly have a trend of overindulgence when it comes to food. It started out with these foods being occasional substitutes for home cooked meals, and pop being a substitute to water. Now water is a substitute to pop, and fast food is almost always a more attractive option then cooking. They have no problem taxing smokers for poor health choices, why not people who refuse to be diet conscience? They both escalate health care costs, it's just that it's socially accepted to single out smoking as a worse decision then drinking a 2Liter of pop a day.

You should come by more often, every board has it's share of rejects but the wall has some great football discussion. As for your comments I don't think Jauron has any connection to Fairchild. If you recall the Bills expressed interest in him before Mularkey quit. Perhaps he was a guy Levy really wanted and Mularkey didn’t. That’s just some speculation but I think it’s safe to say at this point that Fairchild had Levy’s recommendation.

AH....I just assumed being a former RB's coach likely meant he played RB. I like the idea even more if his primary experience is with QB's being that he's showed a commitment to the run in the past.

I hear ya, I guess I'm more optimistic because I spent so much time looking into him. Something just intrigues me about a coordinator with a commitment to the ground game, and knowledge of the Rams passing attack. It's not like the guy's short on experience he just hasn't been calling plays with Martz being around. When he did the Rams looked like a completely different offense then the one Martz ran. They had balance with the ground game, and some production downfield with below average QB's. It's hard to be a great offensive coordinator when you’re trailing all the time, but Fairchild did a more then respectable job givin his situation.

Already I've seen a Killdrive comparison to Fairchild, and another that said he abandoned the running game in St Louis. No evidence supports any of this, in fact it all points in the opposite direction. In order to prove this I decided to breakdown Fairchild’s games in two categories. Category one is games in which the Rams were in control. The criteria for this category is at no point during the game were they trailing by 14 or more. The second category is just the complete opposite, games in which they were trailing by 14 or more at some point. One important number to remember is NFL team's averaged running 46% of the time in 2005, and passed 54% of the time. Category 1 (Never trailing by 14 or more) Total: 123 Runs, 129 Passes, Run%: 49% Category 2 (Trailing by 14 or more) Total: 156 Runs, 255 Passes, Run:%:38% Of the category one games if you remove the game against the 49ers putrid secondary (Rams had 354 Passing Yards), the run%: goes up to 54%. In comparison the Steelers Run% this season was 59% which was far and away the league high. The Rams were down a ton this year, and when you’re down you pass more. Despite that, Fairchild really balanced out the Rams offense when he took over for Martz. Even factoring in the games he was trailing his rush per every 1.4 pass attempts would have placed St Louis 7th in the league in rush frequency. Fairchild not only showed a commitment to the running game in St Louis but also learned a system that allowed average QB's to put up monster numbers. This is a good hire people, be happy, I think we nabbed an up and coming guy that should mesh well with Jauron.

Brilliant deduction, could it be because the Rams were getting killed in most those games? I know three yards and a cloud of dust is a legitimate comeback strategy for some around here, but that's not the way the NFL works. His numbers/history show he is more then committed to running the football, especially when you look at the difference from when Martz was calling the plays.