Matt in KC

Maybe that's what Schobel weighs after 3 months laying off the steroids? Or maybe this is a plot to make our opponents think they can block him with only their LT and no help. ....or maybe it's a typo.

Making him bigger than Schobel. Schobel's weight can't be correct. (Can it?)

I never saw an article or topic here about why Bowen was released. I thought he played very well in preseason before he got hurt (maybe he just didn't heal right?). Anyone hear anything about this? It seems like we really need another safety, even though most people would scoff at drafting another after last year.

Kudos to you for taking the high road, smokinandjokin. I'm glad he's happy and that I don't have to root for the idiot again this year.

Thanks for taking the time to list these out, Kelso's Helmet. I really do want to believe we'll do better next year. I've added my comments under your points below. 1. Same coaches, rookies, and starting QB with an extra year of experience now in the O and D systems. --> I do think this is likely an area of modest improvement. I think the O and D were modified to fit our personell last year, so it will continue to change (such as passing to the TE's), which will help, I think, but not just because the veterans have experience with the plays/assignments. 2. An improved, more veteran-rich OL and DL from both free agency and also from the 2006 draft class' aforementioned new experience...or full health in McCargo's case. --> As I mentioned previously, I think the O-line may take a few games to gel, but likely will be improved. With the Anderson-to-Walker upgrade we should be better. Of course we haven't factored in who gets hurt in 2007 (since we don't know), you've only counted who has healed. Do you think we had more or less than the normal amount of injuries last year? I think it was about average, so McCargo returning will help about the same as someone else getting injured will hurt us. 3. A disgruntled, low-IQ RB with average speed (McGahee post-Fiesta Bowl) replaced with a fresh-legged RB drafted in the first day (Bush?). --> I respond to 3,4, and 5 together below 4. A disgruntled, slowed, unproductive post-Achilles TKO replaced with a speedier day 1 draft pick (Alexander, Black?) who better fits our D system. --> I respond to 3,4, and 5 together below 5. A small, aging MLB who couldn't attack/fill his line gap responsiblities (London) replaced with a bigger, younger, faster, and equally football-intelligent Patrick Willis (no, I don't see the 49ers picking Willis over any of the top DL players at #11). --> Response to 3,4, and 5: Any of these three scenarios may mean an upgrade, but I am very sceptical that we can draft three players who can play as well as McGahee, Fletcher and Spikes in their first year. I would guess only one is as good or an upgrade in 2007. (My money would be on the Spikes upgrade.) I'm not saying it is impossible, just very improbable. I do think, however, that 2-3 years in the future these players will play much better than McGahee, Fletcher and Spikes. 6. Loss of Clements compensated by true implementation of the Tampa Cover-2, as well as contributions from Youboty and whatever other CB's Levy can find in the mid-to-late draft rounds (and this scouting team's track record with CB's has been pretty good over the past 10-15 years). --> Youboty was on the team last year as well. The only change here is we have lost Clements. A draftee/FA could fill in, though I think it's vertually impossible he will play as well as Clements did in 2006. Becasue of this, I don't see how this allows us to play a "true Tampa cover 2" if we couldn't do so with Clements on the roster. 7. RB being among the easiest positions in football for which a college-to-pro rookie can make a significant contribution. To only a slightly lesser extent, the same is true for cover-2 OLB's and CB's who are only responsible for small pockets of the field. At these positions, speed and agility can often trump years of play recognition experience. --> CB and RB addressed above, except for the hypothetical that we trade 2 first days picks for Turner. I think trading would help this year and slightly hurt the next 2-3 years when we could have had other 2 young veterans on the team. I don't have a strong feeling either way.... (anything less than our second round pick and I'd be happy). Am I putting too much of a positive spin on the 2007 season's potential? Perhaps. And I'm not saying I buy 100% into the "we make the playoffs in 2007" argument. Maybe Levy bombs the 2007 draft, and then we're screwed. But I do know one thing: we sure didn't win much when we had TD's assembled cast of name player choke artists like Fletch, Clements, and McGahee. --> I'm still about as confident as I've been before each of the last few seasons. I suspect we'll end within 1-2 games of our record last year, out of the playoffs. --------- Here are some other positives/improvements: JP Losman. I think he is settling in to his new role, relaxing, and starting to play solid football. JP's experience, and resulting confidence/comfort/leadership can have a profound affect on our team performance next year. In general I reject arguments that our players will have another year of experience under their belts, because on the whole our team is getting younger/less experienced. I'd have to do the math to see if our projected starters are getting older or younger (I suspect it's about the same average age as last year with a few positions getting younger and many getting a little older). Better team chemistry. This is one of the biggest wildcards in my opinion, and could swing our record a couple games either direction, though I think we were still "finding our voice" last year, and likely will be improved here. If we can land an average (or better) RB, the left side of our line should be able to dominate on several running plays each game. In this case, the synergy of Dockery playing next to Peters is greater than just adding Dockery. Further Gripes: I wish we replaced John Allaire (Strength and Conditioning Coach). Since Rusty Jone departed we've been poorly conditioned and have had a ton of hamstring pulls.

If everything works out right: 1) We draft Willis and he performs as well as Fletcher immediately (highly doubtful I think). 2) We draft a CB in the 2nd (no way as good as Clements in the first year) 3) SD accepts 2 first day picks for Turner 3b) and he performs significantly better than McGahee (to justify our not signing two draftees) 4) we draft a LB as good as Spikes in the 3rd or lower (doubtful in his first year) 5) Dockery - no contest, this makes us better 6) Walker performs better than Gandy/Reyes (we'll see; I'm as hopeful as anyone) 7) Walker improves the DL (better than Tim Anderson, but so much better it offsets the other losses?) 8) We find a FB better than Shelton (not hard in my opinion) Then yes, we are better than last year. But, that's a lot of "if's". Even our O-line, our biggest improvement, may take several games to "gel." If you take the same approach for any team in the NFL you are likely to conclude that each is likely to improve for next year. Who has more holes to fill than us? Is everyone going to get better? EDIT: Unlike BuffaloLips, however, I both think we're getting worse (for 2007) AND on the right track (for 2007 and beyond). Our moves have been far from pathetic. If anything I think losing so many veterans is courageous and guarantees our team chemistry (mired in mediocrity) is going to change, likely for the better.

Thank you, thank you... I'm actually saying I'm as excited as ever (emotions) for this year, even though I don't see how our record is going to improve significantly until next year (brain). You can choose to wait or not (whatever that means; it's your choice), though I'd love to hear a compelling argument that we'll make the playoffs this year to get me even more excited.

I'd be intereted in hearing Jaworski's opinion about what team has helped their 3-year outlook the most. Mostly we have let go players who would have been a problem over that span. Clements (high salary, risk), Spikes (performance), McGahee (mentality), Fletcher (risk if he insisted on a 5 year deal, and performance, though I'm not convinced), Holcolm (no upside, possible team chemistry problem). Overall, this year's roster looks like they will start the year worse than the guys from last year. I say that because I think it is unlikely we will sign free agents or draft players who can start at the level of the vets who are leaving. I am excited to see how this team grows and gels over the season, who will step into the leadership void, and how they react to adversity. I'd rather get worse this year and break the cycle of mediocrity than suffer another year of the same-ol' with no real change in sight. I don't think this is "our year," but I am already excited for next year if we can sustain a healthy attitude through the season, learn from our mistakes and grow as a TEAM.

wholly crud, he was running-out-into-traffic crazy right after the season and before they brough him back again? Did he ever run over to the wrong sideline...? I'm mostly kidding, since I'm sure he must have gone off his med's in the off-season... but wow. Stigma around mental health issues is so strong I'm surprised he made the team again (even with those fantastic stats). ----------- I'm not sure I really understand what a favorite bust is (with regards to football). I'd be better naming least favorite Hall-of-Famers ....or maybe the most forgettable Bills?

So if the picks traded are fair, the poster worthy of a good reputation will say it's neither of your two choices?

I think since all of the moves definitely help 2008, and we might break even in 2007 (if we have a solid draft), this is the definition of rebuilding. We will emerge in 2008 with a ton of young signed players, extra draft picks, and cap room to extend one or more of our stars. I think explaining the Spikes cut as a cost-savings move (without saying his skill is no longer worth the money) was a good way of talking up his value and "selling" him. Attributing this to the small market team not being able to afford him is fine with me.

Welcome to the Wall, wifeofbillsfan! Did you just find us after the McGahee trade, or have you "lurked" for awhile? Does husbandofwifeofbillsfan also come here? I just moved to KC after living in DC for the last decade. So far, it looks like DC has all of the other cities beat for restaurants, but I agree with whoever said city vs. suburb seems to be the biggest difference. The KC suburbs are choked full of chain restaurants, and make me miss my Capitol Hill hangouts (La Lomita Dos, Park Cafe, Montmartre) and my college dive, Amy's Place by UB. I'd be thrilled to have the Inner Harbor choices nearby. At the intersection of these two points, I'm impressed with how well the Bills decided Willis should leave the team, but did not trash him at all. A hold-out or dispute in the media would have hurt his value and I'm sure the Bills would not have gotten such good draft picks for him. For this alone he should be thankful. Add to this his high draft selection, and his entire first year collecting a huge paycheck for just watching the team, and it's clear this guy should be singing the Bills' praises, not acting like a jacka$$... again.

Hey, that's what a lot of people here have said about Spikes and Holcolm....

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/187671 It looks like 27 tackles, and 9 assists (and 6 sacks, 3 passes defensed). 6' 3'' | 294 pounds. 3 games missed in the last 5 years. His stats look fine to me....

I believe with the new CBA, teams can declare two players "June 1st" cuts at any time, and allocate their remaining cap hit over the next two years (same as the old June 1st cuts). This means they can actually cut the veterans early and give them a better chance to land with a new team. Sorry I don't have a link. I tried to find this in January and I think and spent a half hour and only found a few credible references saying the same thing, but nothing definitive. I do not expect a lot of talent will appear in June, though some old vets will of course be let go between now and training camp. I suspect we'll sign one or two stop-gap veteran players to one or two year deals.

And seeing as both of these questions (sucking and winning a SB) have a price, it makes sense to merge them: Who here would suck someone if it meant the Bills would win the Super Bowl this year? For your post above, I know where you stand.

I was thinking the same think.... Maybe I should take the money, so I could spend it going with a friend to see the Bills in the Superbowl, where they play (in January 2009) based on their own wins, nothing given for free by the same hypothetical question that magically produces my cash.

Not to be cynical, but does anyone else question that the contractor had keys to the house and the most to gain from a flood, and happened to just discover this disaster? I hope Royal has a security system which logs access so he can be sure the contractor didn't come in just before the flood as well.... It's nice to hear some new information about the players!

Maybe we could get Vilma and Briggs for Takeo and our 5th round pick (or one of our many compensatory picks) in a three team trade! That way Vilma and Briggs could compete in camp and we'd know whoever performed better would be a solid starter.... I think this sounds pretty good for us. We should do it.

I wasn't counting his 2003 injury-shortened season. 2004 was a good year for him, but he's been sliding since then. (The three years I refered to were = 2004, 2005, 2006). Actually, the decreases in his YpC and first down stats occurred more with the Bills, not the Texans; they just continued with the Texans. So, while you can argue there were also "variables" on the Bills that hurt him (moreso recently than ever before), I don't know why you'd think next year would be any different. I chose these two stats because they really jump out. I could understand a falling YpC if a reciever started being used as a first down possession-receiver, but this would mean the first downs and/or TDs would have to be going up if this was succeeding. I think it's safe to say Eric wasn't considered a success for the Texans. Also, I think the performance decrease for receivers as they get older is not linear; it excellerates. At some point they "fall off the cliff" and their output drops precipitously. His YpC has fallen for 8 straight years, and I doubt he will play any more than one more year in the NFL.

Eric is averaging about 15 receptions, 250 yards, 2 touchdowns, 1.0 YpC and 10 first downs LESS each year over the last three years. If this continues, he will have 40 receptions, 300 yards, 8.8 YpC, -1 TDs and 23 first downs next year. I would say that's not a very productive year for a #2 receiver. Of course, that's about the same as Josh Reed (34| 410 | 12.1 | 2 | 21) or Price (49 | 402 | 8.2 | 3 | 20). Also, just since I was looking them up, this is Parrish: (23 | 320 | 13.9 | 2 | 10 ). Since this is about what we already have on the team, why put money and time into a reciever who is on his way out and could screw up our adolescent team chemistry?

I'm glad he's back! Anyone know if it's a two-year contract? (I hope)

Take a drink every time they compare a college player to someone in the NFL Hall of Fame. Finish your beer if they actually say "Hall of Fame" or say someone is the best ever at anything. ("May be the best ever..." counts.)

For instance, after our running back is traded, or some other big news breaks, there could be trouble and SDS or a mod might start a topic called something like "beats the stevestojan out of me who Rosened the board" and his first post would say belinda since that's it. Then someone would probably make a crack about pandas. I hope that helps clear things up. Welcome. Normally I feel guilty if I give in to the urge to thread-jack (post or encourage conversation off-topic). In this case, however....

I thought he was a locker room leader. No? I can't believe he trashed his (ex)teammates. The idiot doesn't realize if he plays another 5 years he's likely to have one of them on his team again. Also, we know he's going to play against them (though I'm not sure he does). Brilliant, as usual. Good riddance!