Orton's Arm

My plan would involve going 3-13 in 2006, being pretty good in 2007, and winning the Super Bowl in 2008. After the 2007 season was over, the Bills could sign some free agents to round out their weaker areas. The real question isn't whether Spikes, for example, will retire in a year or two. It's whether he can add more to the team two - three years from now than the draft pick we could get by trading him away. I admit this is a danger of my plan, but I'd rather not go 6-10 or 7-9 for the next umpteen years to avoid this risk. Especially when there's no guarantee that doing so would affect the future location of the franchise anyway. I consider the positions filled by Fletcher et al to be holes already, because those players will be on their last legs when it comes time for the Bills to get serious. Agreed. But I'd add to that: built primarily through the draft. As of now, TD has drafted only six proven starters: McGee, Clements, Crowell, Schobel, McGahee, and Evans. This team doesn't have a much better core of drafted players than an expansion franchise. First the Bills need to build up their core of proven, drafted players. To do that, they need more draft picks. Once the core of young players is built, then you add free agents who maybe only have two or three years left.

Yours is a ridiculous statement. Or do you think the Bills will win the Super Bowl this year or next, when players like Spikes, Fletcher, etc. still have something to offer? Take off the rose colored glasses, pal. The Bills are a rebuilding team. Maybe with Spikes, Fletcher, etc., they'll go 6-10 for the next two years, instead of 3-13. Who cares? I want a Super Bowl ring, and the soonest the Bills can get one is 2007 - 2008. By then the aging veterans I want traded away will have little to offer. But the draft picks we would have gotten from trading those guys away--well, by 2007, those picks would really start to do some good!

If the Bills don't draft Cutler, one of two things will happen: - Losman will work out - Ralph Wilson will die without a Super Bowl ring The Bills could draft Cutler, and make him spend most or all of his rookie year on the bench. If Losman works out, the Bills would have one QB too many on the roster. As for cap space: it's usually better to spend it on your own draft picks than on trying to buy a team in free agency. The Bills would have enough cap space to keep every young player worth keeping. In any case, if Losman plays especially well next year, the Bills could always trade Cutler away. Would they get back what they invested in him? No, but they'd get back something substantial. Now if Losman didn't work out, Cutler would have had a full year to study the playbook, learn in practice, learn in preseason, and otherwise prepare himself. Maybe he'd even have gotten some playing time his rookie year. Cutler could be the starter in his second year, and hopefully get things figured out by his third.

Good. I'd welcome a ton of dead cap space next year, because it would free us up cap-wise for 2007. Any time you have dead cap space, it's like paying off credit card debt. I agree this would absolutely cripple our defense for 2006; helping the Bills draft near the very top of the 2007 draft. The point is to win the Super Bowl in 2008, so those draft picks we'd would have gotten in 2006 for trading away our veteran core would help the 2008 team a lot more than a bunch of defenders at the ends of their careers.

It's true your plan would make the Bills competitive in 2006. But it wouldn't win them the Super Bowl. The most direct path to achieving a Super Bowl ring is to achieve greatness in three areas: OL, DL, QB. The Bills have drafted only one proven starter in any of these three areas, and Aaron Schobel isn't above average for a starter. - Trade away everyone over 30: Moulds, Spikes, Fletcher, Holcomb, Adams, even Vincent and Milloy if someone would give me picks for them. Rebuilding teams shouldn't refuse to trade away old guys. - If Cutler is better than any of the QBs we'd have a shot at next year, I say draft him. The Bills haven't found a proven successor to Kelly, and the franchise can't win any Super Bowls until we do. - Go OL with picks 2, 3 and 3. - Use the picks for Moulds, Fletcher, etc. on a TE, and on defense. - Use most 2nd day 2006 picks on defense. - Use the 2007 draft on defense. - Franchise Clements, then either sign him or trade him away. By 2007, the Bills would be strong at QB (either Losman or Cutler), OL, TE, WR, RB, and most defensive positions. Whatever weaknesses the defense had at that time could be addressed via free agency. It would probably take another year for this team to gel, but the Bills would be good in 2007, and potential Super Bowl champions in 2008.

You're right that the situation goes back months, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise. All I was saying is that McNabb would have been willing to overlook that other stuff had it not been for the Favre comment. Also, that McNabb interpreted the Favre comment to be about race.

Thanks for your excellent post; though I disagree with the part that I've quoted. During the whole T.O. controversy, I really came to question whether McNabb was putting his ego ahead of the team. For all his faults, T.O. gave the team everything he had, and put up over 100 receiving yards against the Patriots in a game most people felt he would be too injured to play in at all. Compare that to McNabb, a guy whose poor conditioning led him to get exhausted in the 4th quarter. It's possible this cost the Eagles the game. If I had given everything I had--as T.O. had done--and if my QB didn't do his best to prepare for the game, I'd be a little ticked. In fact, I'd be furious. So along comes this year. T.O.'s decision to be disruptive in training camp sounds like something done on the advice of his agent, Drew Rosenhaus. If so, it was really dumb advice. T.O. created a few other disruptions after that situation settled down, the biggest of which was the Favre comment. But that Favre comment, if you read the words, sounds like it was just made in admiration for what Favre brings to the table. You could say Favre's best days are behind him, but T.O. made it clear he felt differently--that Favre is an elite QB even at this stage in his career. McNabb's comments made it clear he interpreted the Favre remark as a racial attack. It was fairly obvious at the time that McNabb wanted T.O. off the team after the Favre comment was made. But for a racial attack? For "black-on-black crime"? I have a hard time understanding why McNabb would want to cost himself, and his team, a chance at a Super Bowl ring just to avoid hearing himself compared to Brett Favre. The Eagles came so close to winning that game, and T.O.'s 100+ receiving yards were a big reason why. I suspect McNabb has gotten so caught up with whatever emotions he has that he's blinded himself to what T.O. did and could continue to do for the team. Either that, or he just didn't care.

Welcome to the boards, and thanks for the insight about Cutler.

A name like that would be hard to live up to. In any case, I'll wait until Cutler is actually on the team.

It would be more of an insult to be compared to Aaron Brooks than to be compared to Favre.

I came across this: http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/PHI/9202654 McNabb had this to say about the TO situation!! So it would have been okay (sort of) for TO to have said another black QB might have been better than McNabb. But because it was a white QB getting the praise, TO needs to be kicked off the team. Real mature, McNabb. Real mature.

I like those odds, and the Bills need a QB. If you're right, then Cutler all the way!!!

Culpepper had some good years when he was just throwing it up there for Randy Moss to catch. He looked poor without Moss, and Brad Johnson clearly outplayed him. While the Bills clearly are in need of a long-term solution at QB, Culpepper is not the answer.

If Cutler is going to be a real NFL QB, the Bills should take him. If not, they should at least steer clear of guys like Winston Justice, who has a little too much in common with Mike Williams for my liking.

I heard that! For the Bills, the best possible JP failure scenario involves a bright young star like Jay Cutler emerging to take his place.

This may surprise some people, but I voted yes. The Bills are a rebuilding team, so they need to trade away every older player who has significant trade value. Holcomb does have more to offer than most people realize, but by the time the Bills have the right supporting cast for him in place, he won't be the same player he is now.

Three reasons: 1) Holcomb's passer rating in 2005 was substantially higher than his prior career average. 2) Frerotte may not have performed up to Saban's expectations. 3) The arrival of Mike Mularkey. I'm not saying the Dolphins will make us this offer, just that there's a chance they might.

Gus Frerotte's QB rating for 2005 was 71.9. Holcomb's was 85.6. Holcomb knows Mike Mularkey's offense, and could make an immediate impact for the Dolphins. The Dolphins seem to have enough talent to be able to do something, except the QB position is holding them back. So would you trade them Holcomb--a guy who would help them win now--to get a 3rd round pick who might help us win later?

- Nobody that's scheduled to be a FA QB represents a clear upgrade to Holcomb. So there's no point in messing with those guys. - Guys we'd have to trade for (like Kitna) will only be good for a few years. The Bills are a rebuilding team, and there's no sense in trading away the long-term benefits of draft picks for quick but temporary fixes like Kitna. - The Bills could adequately address the OL by using picks 2, 3, and 3 on it; thereby saving the #1 pick for the QB. Offensive players take longer to develop, so fix the offense this year, and the defense next year. There are too many needs to fix everything in one year.

Whether you're right in saying that or not doesn't affect my original point. No player has voiced public support for Losman returning to being the starter. Untrue. The defensive players I've seen quoted have been pretty upfront about their unit's poor play. Should Holcomb have played badly to avoid splitting the locker room? It's funny. I've heard criticism of Holcomb for not having a starter's mindset; as shown by the fact he didn't demand to be the starter. Now I'm hearing criticism of Holcomb from the opposite angle. This tells me that maybe Holcomb's actions were pretty moderate. It's been said that if you think you have two quarterbacks, you really don't have any. Holcomb could give a team quality play for another two - three years, but an older QB like him isn't ideal for a rebuilding team like the Bills. That's why the Bills should be looking at guys like Cutler.

The 2004 defense produced good statistical results by truly dominating the many poor offenses it faced; not by standing up to offensively strong teams. Witness the nine minute Pittsburgh drive that ended Buffalo's playoff hopes. As for Sammy Morris; I remember most of his first half yards coming from one or two really big runs.

Unless your defense is as good as Baltimore's in 2000, you're not winning any Super Bowl rings without superior QB play. Usually to get that level of play you have to spend some money and/or a high draft pick. How well would Pittsburgh have done with Tommy Maddox at QB?

Funny, I've asked myself the same question. Um, I hate to break this to you, but for the 99.99% of Bills fans who don't have inside sources, media reports are about all we have to go on. I'm not claiming they're always going to have the same level of precision as a statistically rigorous survey analysis, but they're better than nothing. It's not clear what aspect of these media reports you're calling into question. Are you saying that fewer people in the locker room supported Johnson than what was indicated? Do you have any evidence at all to back up your suspicion?

All right, Ramius. If you're claiming to have read this thread, there's no excuse for the below post: How is that a rational response to this: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?act=S...ndpost&p=588206 You embarrass yourself further: Again, I didn't write that Losman should be released, or denied his chance to prove himself in 2006. If he lives up to your hopes, he'll prove his critics (including me) wrong. But if he falls on his face, the Bills will be happy to have obtained a Cutler to come in and get the job done.

Um, yeah.