Einstein's Dog

I think it comes out to like around $10M because the signing bonus doesn't transfer over. And that's before the Bills/Beane do their tricks of 2 year deal w signing bonus stuff. D Henry isn't an ordinary RB. He is the physical peak RB performer, top 3 in the league, defensive coordinator nightmare. D Henry elevates the offense. He is a playmaker that needs to be game planned for.

To me, that RB would need to be D Henry. While I am usually in the don't do RB camp, my exception is D Henry. What a beast. Would change the way defenses would have to play us.

It might happen. Hines is an RB/Ster and is Cooks backup - so he is not the same. At slot last year we started with Crowder/McKenzie and rookie Shakir (and needed to later get Beasley). So this year going with Harty/McKenzie and Shakir doesn't seem outrageous. Actually Harty's versatility seems like it is a plus to asset management - he can be the backup STer (to Hines), replace Crowder and Beas, and take over the Smoke Brown speed element.

True, but they do try and integrate them in with a developmental plan for bigger roles. Like they tried last year with Gabe and Spencer. That didn't work out so well but you can see the logic. As for LB I hope they go light and use the resources on offense. For LB let Bernard and this years 3rd rounder (Campbell?) and bargain basement vet LB compete for the job. The surprise re-signing of Poyer should reduce the money alloted to MLB. The defensive talent seems loaded to me outside of this one MLB position. I would like the FO to only get bargain basement signings on the defense now (which include Phillips + Lawson, and a draft choice or two). I would rather the resources go to offense, particularly the OL and if possible a WR (w bargain RB). WR is tricky because the FA market stinks. A veteran of the talked about likes of OBJ, D Hop, J Jeudy, M Evans/C Godwin. I admire the FO's ability to wait on RBs, but if they can't pull the trigger on one of the veteran WRs I have to say for me there is a lure to D Henry.

No way!!! No need to re-tool or rebuild. The Bills have a shot! Go for it. i am on the get a WR train. I don't think Gabe is the guy. There don't seem to be many good ones available in the draft or FA. So I hope Beane can do a trade. Get one of Hopkins or Jeudy or M Evans/C Godwin. With another good WR the Bills would be in the conversation once again as one of the Super Bowl favorites. Move Oliver, get a good WR, get a semi-decent MLB and bargain basement or draft the rest - RB, safety, OL.

You replace Davis with D Hopkins/M Evans, maybe B Cooks. Looking for more of an upgrade than a replacement. Move on from Beas + McKenzie and give Shakir more playing time.

You can't be seriously whining about the DL. They kept at it because it is hugely important position. The FO finally came up with an excellent group. The DL tinkering/improvement was a large part of the Bills being listed as Superbowl favorites. Injuries took their toll, but when healthy that DL group was rivaling the best the Bills have ever had. Smart FO's put resources into the DL. Where do you think the Bills rank in money allocated to the RB group last season? Bottom 10 probably. And for next season if they go with Cook/restructured Hines/4th rounder R Johnson/ and a waited out, last remaining chair type, veteran FA RB. Once again bottom 10. That would not be a ton of resources into the RB position - actually quite the contrary.

Everyone here is hoping they invest in the OL. And most are on board with WR help (as am I). Doesn't mean you ignore the RB room. Just because Dorsey (and Josh) struggled with Hines and Cook doesn't mean that getting a Thunder (R Johnson) would be mishandled. As a 4th rounder complement to the lightning of Cook (and Hines if he takes a reduced salary) there could be good value there.

You don't stop looking for an RB if you're not set at the position - that would be insane. They're going to make a move, they pretty much have to- either FA or the draft. As for the prior draft choices, those are sunk costs. That's the past, glad the FO is forward looking.

I think you need to list them in tiers. My hope is along these lines: Tier 1, good sized investment- OL Ben Powers, I Seumalo, M McGlinchey WR - OBJ, M Thomas, J Meyers, trade and pay D Hopkins, M Evans Tier 2 LB- Vander Esch, Lavonte David, maybe Van Noy- a good veteran LB that comes at half the price of Edmunds Tier 3 - bargain basement, picked up after the feeding frenzies - RB and Safety I'd like to see tier 1 and tier 2 picked up before the draft.

What? Hock was picked before the Bills took Oliver. And Hock was so good Detroit traded him.

True, Frazier had some good results overall. But I was harboring some of the feelings a lot of others on here had - 1. His bend but don't break base set was kind of annoying, and 2. The Playoff problems. I wonder/hope if this move might also signal that the FO is considering moving some resources to emphasis offense a little more. For instance, letting Edmunds and Poyer leave and contemplate seeing what they can get for Oliver. And instead invest in OL, WR, and maybe RB.

But when you say Stefon is a first round + that means the FO invested even more in the Offense. Same with when you move up for Josh, that's a big investment in the offense. While the OP's is flawed, the lazy narrative that the FO neglects the offense is also flawed. With all that said, I'll be disappointed if the FO doesn't put some resources into the O this offseason. I believe they will.

I think the FO can do several moves, not many splash though. But I am with you and would like to see more resources put towards the offensive side.. I'd like to see the FO get a FA OLman, and draft one. Then also get a veteran skill position offensive player - an OBJ/Hopkins/Evans/Thomas or D Henry. To do multiple moves it would mean unloading defensive salary - Edmunds gone, Poyer gone, I wouldn't mind seeing Oliver traded.

Beane in trouble for his job? C'mon. This is coming off an early superbowl favorite team that went through unimaginable circumstances and yet still ended up 14-4. Beane is not on the hot seat. Not at all. Just stop. As for your crusade concerning the OL. The Bills OL investments into the OL have included round one pick Dawkins, a high pick in C Ford, a high pick in S Brown, and also a pick in Doyle along with a six million dollar investment in Saffold. Your arbitrary years and arbitrary number (92) aside, the FO has been looking and tinkering with the OL. Lots of people here don't like the results. I would bet the FO isn't satisfied either and adjusts again this offseason. Your cherry picking some arbitrary number cutoff (92) combined with lack of context (Dawkins was already on the team) in an effort to conclude that Beane has devoted fewer resources to the OL than any team in the league seems disingenuous. It reeks of a predetermined bias attempted to be supported by made up conditions and numbers.

The hybrid I would like to see is one that transitions resources to the offense a little. So no Poyer, no Edmunds, and look at possibly moving Ed. Then you add a FA lb (cheaper Edmunds replacement), free agent OL (Saffold replacement), FA WR -this could be the one bigish ticket item an OBJ, or D Hop, or M Thomas. Then draft an OL, and WR along w BPA of what is needed on D (another LB, Safety)

I see a lot of clamoring for drafting offense. I hope they strongly consider the buy/trade for another WR. Get someone like Chark or trade for Hopkins. For the funds for that, two of Edmunds/Poyer/Oliver would be gone. This kind of restructure would allow for drafting defense and OL.

Online sportsbook SportsBetting.ag released odds this week for the Pro Bowl running back Barkley’s next team (if not the Giants). The Baltimore Ravens were given the best odds at +400. The Buffalo Bills (+425), Denver Broncos (+500), New York Jets (+600), and New England Patriots (+700) were also listed in the top five.

The Defensive Line. In particular Epenesa and Boogie "January" Basham. In a related note, the board will have a week reprieve from bashing Beane on his over-investment in the DL.

I hope you're joking. Most reasonable posters do not begrudge a STHer from getting a benefit. My whining was about an inability to price out a ticket (as an out of towner trying to come in for the game). The roller coaster of the pricing has just started.

There may be a lot of conversation for a game that might not be played but on the other hand it's an event that may happen in 12 days. I'd love to get some friends together and do a road trip (I'm in FL now). Getting an estimate on the ticket price helps with the overall estimate (looks like I could say $400).

Didn't know that. Of course they should honor that. I hope they move through the process quickly, they will have both KC and the Bills to do.

Interesting to see you comment on not feeling real sympathetic when the early comment that started this was your whining about hoping the front office didn't jack the price up for the poor working folk. If they put the price near the market, say around $400 a ticket, to STHers it might help stop the roller coaster price scenarios that we've seen in the past. And I don't care about STHers making a profit. What I care about is the uncertainty and delay that hinders planning.

The problem is that now the whole process makes it hard for some people to plan/budget (like myself). Knowing STHers doesn't help. First you don't know if they can get tickets and now secondly you can't just ask them to put you in for them because they can resell them for much more than what they pay for them (at least that was the case w the Miami playoff game). And even if they only allow STHers to buy the number they own- everyone who can, will buy, and if not using ,will put up on the resale market for a pretty healthy profit.

I think we should stop worrying about the "poor working folk" and worry more about the ruthless scalping that will be going on from the STHers that get a chance to get tickets. I hope they offer at a price that is close to market so that STHers don't buy tickets they don't intend to use.