RaNdom

Sounds like Seattle just drafted Aaron Maybin... 240lb speed rusher Bruce Irvin.

That's not too useful of a statistical analysis, as of course, a first rounder will be more successful than a later round player. A more apt analysis would compare to success rates of becoming a 3 year starter in the specific round, i.e. comparing a qb from round 6 to position players success from round 6. A late round pick is rarely expected to be very successful as it is, so a 5-16% qb success rate might not be that low, relatively. As long as you're not relying on the player to be a starter/contributor right away, which nobody should be. Yes, it would be idiotic of a team to draft an expected first year starter in the later rounds. It probably isn't that much greater of a risk to draft a qb at that stage, assuming you have adequate depth and ST/role players, which has not been the case for the Bills in a long time. And really, that gamble usually pays dividends as long as you can afford it (Like the Patsies/Packers with Cassel, Mallet, Flynn, etc). It did not work out for Levi Brown, but if the team trusts in Fitzy and we assume the team has sufficient depth (which I'm not sure it does), then a late round gamble on a project qb might be worthwhile.

The article talks about free agents that would normally have been deemed restricted free agents with less than 6 years experience, but now would be unrestricted without compensation. Braylon has 7.

The situation where he applies game theory is best illustrated by his draft strategies. Whether he gets the best players he could have is debatable, but he takes a long-term view and maximizes the continuing value of his draft picks.

This is the most embarrassing team that I can remember. It actually made me long for the Donahoe days where we had some excitement... and it's so bad that it's making me grow to appreciate Dick/Fewell more... how on earth were they almost competitive with essentially the same team??

all same for me except the Knicks. i feel almost like i should be obligated to root for the Clippers... mostly because they used to be the braves, but also that would kind of fit the spiritual futility...

as per Tim Graham's recent blog post... Sporting News Top 100 Players Interesting that there are more former bills (winfield, pwilliams) on the list than current bills (TO). Also of note, a certain "best OT in the league" is not on the list either...

big difference is that gilbride had experience, IIRC... both as a well-respected OC and then as a failed head coach. he just didn't have the personnel to match his schemes here and was unable to adjust...

that was a smart play... smart coach.

stream here... woohoo. go bills. http://www.ustream.tv/channel/tml-live

man, maybin's got some clown feet... like sideshow bob. i thought they were just exaggerating about his size 15s in all those articles.

(in memory of the SJ = Larry Fitzgerald thread...) He jumps over an Escalade...

absolute worst thing they could possibly do is trade future #1s to move up in the draft.

yeah... and it's about 8 comments up...

The Poll humor... but oh so true. They must have a bills fan on staff...

From this Link completely pointless and useless, but nonetheless interesting. standard fantasy draft with heavy weight towards running backs... but what i found most interesting was that mcgahee was drafted 2nd! hopefully his value holds true in reality. other tidbits, moulds in rd 7, evans in rd8. buff defense was 5th defence taken overall (after bal, ne, pit, iggles). i think evans could have a bigger fantasy impact than moulds, but hopefully they both prove explosive this year. oh. travis henry was actually drafted in the 10th round. before the def. goes to show how overvalued rbs are in fantasy sports.

The real question is... how did YOU come across these pics?

that's too bad. i actually want to see the bills play cinci at full strength. i want to see if the bills are for real that will extend beyond this regular season or if it's an illusion that will come crushing down soon after.

it's been pointed out previous on the wall that the bills haven't really beaten a good team and yet are professing they have a track to the playoffs. and i've been doing the stupid thing and thinking beyond the cleveland game, but... 1) i think the bengals have a chance to beat the patsies. - i dont' think the patsies will go all out against them. they've essentially wrapped up the playoffs and maybe they're thinking homefield, but they're not going to show anything new. - could a classic letdown game. 2) cincinnati might be tough to beat. - the bengals have beaten some decent teams (baltimore, denver... ) come close against some good teams (pitt) and didn't get really blown out in any game. - they beat a baltimore team that killed the bills. - they have a real kicker. too bad he used to be a bill, but it's probably going to be a close game and they have a kicker they can trust.

this whole debate is quite annoying. first, for ragging on people who don't want to cheat... but more importantly, ragging on people who put less importance on money. this quote is reflective of that argument... what good is money and "your name in a record book" going to do for you when you're dead? (especially in sports where records are made to be broken) is your life centered around making money? will you do anything to do accomplish that goal? some people just draw a more solid line than others.

product testimony: "atkins and tanning salons worked for me!" -santa claus

It's even harder to compare in the era of the salary cap. would montana have won those championships if they didn't have all those amazing players on offense AND defense? jerry rice, john taylor, dwight clark, roger craig, randy cross, tim mckyer, charles haley, ronnie lott? i don't even know who else they would have. obviously one of peyton's biggest weaknesses (and coincidentally brady's greatest strength) is their defense. so should that become a factor in how good a qb is?

what about protection of minors? since it's a public broadcast, are you sure you want impressionable minors listening/watching? there aren't many restrictions for what adults can do (i.e. pr0n within legal bounds), but i think they're merely being wary of what is publicly accessible to those that are not adults yet. a similar parallel would be, are you suggesting there not be any ratings systems and restrictions on movies? (R, NC-17, etc)

what the??! 8 yds total russhing for indy? edge with 3 rushes? crazy...