Orton's Arm

They'll feel that KC's success only really began once the Chiefs fired Edwards.

Very good post. Pittsburgh got to and won the Super Bowl because it had a complete team. During the playoffs, the running game often wasn't there, so Big Ben stepped up and played lights out football. In the Super Bowl, the passing game wasn't working, so other parts of the team made up for it with their excellent play. It's true Losman could have provided the equivalent of Big Ben on a bad day. The same could be said about just about any QB in the league. What remains to be seen is whether JP can step up and play the way Roethisberger did en route to the Super Bowl.

I can see it now: let's say I owned a bar in Ellicottville, and JP was hitting on my girlfriend. Let's say she responded by paying him a compliment. "Sue," (or whatever she was named), "I see you're speaking highly of JP. Out of my bar! Now!"

I liked the article's detail, but I disagreed with the idea of using all those early draft picks on the secondary. This year's draft is deep along the offensive line. There's no sense letting that go to waste with just one OG as a first-day OL draft choice. I noticed he referred to "Shaun Williams" instead of Shaud Williams, and that he wrote Jerman was quality depth. While displaying occassional lapses of knowledge such as those, I respect the thought that went into his work.

Nah. Nor do I start fake rumors about people.

I think the Moulds call was worse.

Since Jim Kelly retired, the Bills have spent three first round picks, two second round picks, a third round pick, a fourth round pick, and a fifth round pick trying to find his replacement. Once the Bills find the right QB, it won't be necessary to do much more than spend the occassional 2nd day pick on a backup QB. That will free up a lot of picks for the defense, OL, and other team needs. I agree there's no excuse for the way TD neglected the OL though.

Do you think the NFL payed the Rolling Stones for their mediocre performance? I do. Do you think the other musicians there got paid? I do. Why should Montana do something for free or a low fee when others are getting paid? As was discussed earlier, the relationship between the NFL and Montana was a two-way street: each helped the other get money. So they're even, which means Montana should be treated like every non-football celebrity the NFL invited in.

You know, I could say that I've found a way to rise above my frustration over those four games. Of course, I'd be lying, but I could still say it.

Yes, but his rating was 98.6 for the year. It's true he didn't win the game for them, but his dominant play in the regular season and the playoffs is a big reason why the Steelers got there in the first place. I'm pretty sure some of Jim Kelly's Super Bowl passer ratings weren't all that good, but I don't know anyone is using that to say we wasted a draft pick on the guy.

You bring up some good points. Clearly, there's a chance any given pick, no matter where in the draft he was taken, and no matter what position he plays, can be a bust. So no strategy is guaranteed to be successful. You just have to calculate probabilities. On average, players taken earlier tend to have more successful careers than those taken later. If TD was talking with Houston about trading up, he had to believe Roethlisberger had a better shot of being a successful QB than Losman did. Otherwise, why take Roethlisberger at 10 when you can take Losman at 23? TD's refusal to pay Houston's price is why I feel a Band-Aid approach was used. And that's too bad, because an outstanding QB can really keep your team competitive for a long time. John Elway, taken first overall, helped get his team to five Super Bowls, including two wins. Joe Montana earned four Super Bowl rings for his team. Some say an outstanding defense is better than an outstanding passing game. These people point to teams like the '85 Bears and the 2000 Ravens as examples of champions who didn't have elite QB play. But it's hard to keep a defense elite year after year. The Ravens had the best defense of the late '90s/2000s, but have only one Super Bowl ring to show for it. The '85 Bears likewise only earned one ring. Teams that go to the Super Bowl multiple times in a decade--the '70s Steelers, the '80s 49ers, the '80s/'90s Broncos, the '90s Cowboys and Bills, the 2000s' Patriots--tend to have guys at or near the Hall of Fame level playing QB. That's why it's usually a mistake to try to pinch pennies on your QB. It's one thing to select a QB in the third round that you're really sold on (which the '49ers did with Montana). It's another to select a QB late in the first round, because the guy you really wanted (Roethlisberger) proved to be too expensive.

Parrish and Evans have similar measurables. A 2005 receiving corps consisting of Moulds, Parrish, and Reed would have been respectable. In any case, the Bills traded away their 2nd and 5th round picks in 2004, plus their first round pick in 2005 to get Losman. Let's say Houston really wanted to rob us, and so demanded our first round picks in 2004 + 2005 for Roethlisberger. That would still leave the Bills an extra 2nd and 5th round pick with which to address the receiving corps or the OL.

Let's dissect this post. On the one hand, you suggest the Bills and their fans should abandon the search for the next Kelly. On the other, you say that it was a "good move" to trade away a first round pick for just one good year of Bledsoe play. Don't you realize that teams like Indy or Pittsburgh that have found their franchise QBs can go ten years or more without investing a first-day draft pick in the position? That teams like that aren't stuck comparing the Blake starting QB option with trading away a first round pick for a guy with little left in the tank? Unfortunately, the Bills have tried quick fixes to get the problem solved. Kelly was a first round pick. So what do the Bills try to do to replace him? First, they try a second round pick with Todd Collins. Then they trade away a third round pick for Billy Joe Hobart. Next it's a first and fourth rounder traded away for Rob Johnson. After that, it's a first round pick traded away for Bledsoe. It finally dawns on someone at One Bills Drive that, if Jim Kelly was a Buffalo Bills draft pick in the first round, they should maybe, um, use a draft pick on a QB in the first round. But once again they tried to do this on the cheap: instead of paying Houston whatever price they wanted for Roethlisberger, the Bills decided to spend a later first round pick on a guy who had a smaller chance of working out. Fix something the right way, and you only need to fix it once. Try a Band-Aid solution, and you'll fix the problem again and again and again. At QB, the Bills have chosen the latter route. That's why there is no proven successor to Jim Kelly.

I felt the Steelers played a better game than the Seahawks. But yeah, there's no way to be sure about which team would have won had the officiating been even.

Yeah, I noticed that too. I was surprised no penalty was called.

The difference between Losman and Roethlisberger is that the Steelers are a much better team with Roethlisberger as opposed to Maddox, while the same can't be said of Losman versus Holcomb. I really do wish TD had paid whatever price Houston was demanding, because the Bills haven't had a QB since Jim Kelly. If Houston wanted a CB that badly, we could have given them our first round pick plus Nate Clements.

If Mike Williams is cut, I would advise him to play for Parcells. If anyone can figure out a way to get under that guy's skin and get him motivated, it would be Parcells.

I like the idea of at least experimenting with putting Mike Williams on the defensive line. He still does have the raw talent that made him a #4 pick, and you'd think that talent could be put to use somewhere. At RT, he struggled with small but quick pass rushers simply going around him. At DT, you'd think a guy like that could simply maul people, without getting caught up in the complexity of OG. My biggest concern is whether he has the heart, toughness, and nastiness to be a good DT.

Agreed. I don't think either team will have much success running the ball until at least halfway through the third quarter. But if the Steelers can give Big Ben quality pass protection--which I think they'll be able to--Seattle will be in for a long day.

To reach the Super Bowl, the Steelers had to beat the #1, #,2 & #3 teams in the strong AFC. Who have the Seahawks beaten? Washington? Get real. A beat-up Carolina team? That's more of an accomplishment, but not at the same level as what the Steelers have done. Based on who's proven what, my prediction is a Steel City win.

I hope you're joking.

In three years, Fletcher will be 34, and Spikes will be 32. I could see Spikes having some use in three years, assuming he's able to come back 100% from his injury. You're right to say there's a risk with draft picks, and that sometimes you end up with the next Russell Copeland. But the way I figure it, the more points you're able to throw at players on draft day, the more good players you're likely to end up with. If your success rate for 2nd round picks is 33%, then you have to figure that if you have three 2nd round picks, you're likely to end up with one good player. I do think there's something to be said for the culture of winning. A player that gives everything he has certainly contributes to that. It would be hard to part with Spikes in particular for that reason. It would all depend on how good the draft pick being offered was.

Your post is right on the money. I've been saying this for some time.

At least he admits it.

Then your book is worthless. But I could have told you that already. Not true. I don't know enough about Cutler to be sure the Bills should draft him. I've written that the Bills should take a long, hard look at Cutler. If they conclude he's the real deal, then they should draft him.