Orton's Arm

Call me nuts then, because I am absolutely not sold on Fitz as the Bills' starting quarterback. I'll grant he played well in week 3 of the preseason. But I also remember Edwards and Losman having some very good preseason games. Fitz's issue is and always has been his lack of consistent throwing accuracy. I don't think you can fix that. As for the Bills winning the Super Bowl this season: hope all you want, but it isn't going to happen. There are a series of steps the Bills still need to take before they have a Super Bowl caliber team. I hope they take those steps as quickly and as efficaciously as possible. If in the 2012 draft the Bills could add a franchise QB and one other solid, starting caliber player--ideally an offensive lineman--I'd call it a very successful draft.

I fully agree Fitzpatrick isn't a franchise QB. But then again, neither is Garrard. Hopefully the Bills will have a nice, early pick in the first round of the 2012 draft which they'll use to solve their quarterback problems once and for all!

You are right: I meant Dareus, not Stroud. I agree that Jasper is a project. So why not plug him in at a position where his size and physical attributes give him the potential to be special? (In this case, NT.)

Over in another thread, people were commenting on how well Carrington has been playing. They see him as a third round pick very well spent, and would like to have him as a starter at OLB. But at 300 lbs, he really belongs on the DL. He's listed as Dareus's backup at 3-4 LDE. Then at NT, you have Pro Bowler Kyle Williams being backed up by Troup. Troup came on strong in the second half of last season, and looks to be developing into a solid NT. RDE is arguably the weakest position on the DL. But even there, it's Dwan Edwards backed up by Spencer Johnson. Kellen Heard is the Bills' third string DL. The defensive line has become the Bills' deepest and most talent-rich position. The offensive line is arguably the greatest area of need. If Jasper is given time to learn the NT position, he could very well develop into a long-term answer there. A 370 pound NT makes much more sense than a 370 pound RT! A 3-4 defense should have two good NTs so that they can spell each other and keep each other fresh. If Troup and Jasper were to become those two good NTs, Kyle Williams could be moved to his more natural position at DE. Then the Bills' starting DL lineup would be Dareus, Troup or Jasper, and Williams. I'd love to see opposing offenses try to deal with that! The above plan would mean that Dwan Edwards would be moved from starter to backup, and Spencer Johnson would be moved from backup to third string or off the roster. I'm not necessarily in love with the idea of demoting those two players. On the other hand, both guys are going into their eighth years in the league. If you were to give Jasper a year on the practice squad to learn to play NT, then when the time came for him to take Spencer Johnson's place on the roster, Johnson be going into his ninth year in the league. I realize that even then Johnson would probably still have a few good years left in him. You have to weigh the loss of those years against the benefit of being able to move Williams to DE, while still receiving very solid play from the NT position from the Troup/Jasper combo. Edit: fixed. (Thanks, Fan in Chicago for pointing out the error.)

Fair points. I agree that right now, Jasper's style of play is better suited for OL than DL. That said, I feel that it's quite possible the coaches could, over time, alter Jasper's style of play to make it better-suited for DL. The only barrier would be if he had some mental limitation--such as a potential lack of field awareness, as you've hinted at--which would prevent him from fully adapting to the DL position. However, I find it difficult to believe that all that much mental capacity is required to be a successful DL. Vince Lombardi once said that a DL should be as big as a gorilla and as strong as a gorilla. And that if he's as smart as a gorilla, then that's smart enough! I'll grant that the game has changed since Lombardi's day. But still . . . Leon Lett had a very good career as a DT, and he wasn't exactly the embodiment of mental prowess or on-field awareness. You'd think that anything Lett could learn to do, Jasper could learn also. However, Jasper hasn't learned good DL technique yet, which in my opinion is why he currently looks better as an OL than as a DL.

On the surface at least, this seems insane! Any time you have a player who weighs 375 pounds, why on earth would you think offensive line as opposed to NT? I realize Jasper didn't produce right away. But guess what? Last year, Troup had an entire offseason to prepare. Plus, he was going from being a defensive lineman in college to a DL in the NFL. And yet he didn't produce either--at least not right away. It took him until later in the season to learn good technique and to stop getting pushed around. Just because a guy who played OG for Bethel College didn't learn how to become a dominating NT right away doesn't mean he has no long-term future at the position! The whole purpose of putting Jasper on the practice squad in the first place should be to give him time to learn to play NT in a comparatively low-pressure setting. (As opposed to being told you only have a few short weeks to transition to the pros, learn a new position, and start producing before Kellen Heard takes your roster spot.) Physically, Jasper has the tools to be a much better NT than an OL. I realize his skill set at NT isn't well-developed, but that's exactly what the practice squad is supposed to be for!

This doesn't sound accurate to me. When the Bills signed Brohm to the active roster, the Packers made him an offer equal to that of the Bills'. Brohm chose Buffalo over Green Bay. I take this to imply that if some other team made Jasper an offer, and if the Bills made a counter-offer, it would be up to Jasper to decide which team he wanted to play for.

For whatever it's worth, the Buffalo Bills' depth chart has Carrington listed as a backup LDE in a 3-4. This makes sense to me. Ideally the LBs in a 3-4 are supposed to be jacks of all trades; so that the offense is kept guessing about whether any given LB will rush the passer, drop back into coverage, or stay at home. A 300+ pound guy like Carrington isn't all that much of a threat to drop back into pass coverage.

I can't disagree with anything in the above post. That said, I'd like to point out another factor which has contributed to the Bills' traditional lack of production at the TE position. The offensive line! If your OTs are mediocre at best, you'll often need to keep TEs in to help them block. If the Bills had OTs who could consistently win one-on-one battles against DLs, it would free up the TEs to make plays as pass receivers. You hit the nail on the head about the Bills' traditional lack of talent at the TE position. Maybe one of the reasons they haven't pursued TE talent more aggressively is the thought that TE may be a non-critical position if the TEs are just there to help conceal the shortcomings of the OTs.

This looks good. If you were going to use the P1 label on anything, I think it should be quarterback. Only because of the importance of having a franchise QB in this league. An argument could also be made that RT should be downgraded from P2 to P3. The reason I say this is because of Hairston. If the probability of him being the long-term answer at RT was 0%, RT would be P2. If it was a 100% chance of Hairston being our RT of the future, the position would be P9. To me, P3 seems like a good, intermediate position between those extremes.

The information Lawyer Milloy provided was clearly a quick fix, not a long-term solution to the problem of how to beat the Patriots. Then again, TD never saw a quick fix he didn't like!

Nix's Hairston remark and the Jasper comment were the two things which stood out to me. I suspect the Bills may like Hairston's long-term potential at LT more than Bell's.

Erik, your post was uncalled-for. If you think ieatcrayonz is guilty of a statistical error (which he isn't), all that's necessary is to point out the error. To see why his earlier post is correct, I'll start with a simple example. If you flip a coin, the probability of getting heads is 1/2. If you flip a coin twice, the probability of getting heads twice in a row is 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4. As you seem to know already, once an event is in the past it no longer affects future probabilities. Before you start flipping a coin your odds of getting heads twice in a row are 1/4. But if you flip it once and it comes up heads, your odds of getting heads a second time are now 1/2. If you'd flipped an unweighted coin ten consecutive times, and it came up heads every time, your odds of getting heads on the eleventh flip are still 1/2. There is no such thing as being "due" for tails. ieatcrayonz understands this also. He correctly indicated that there is a 13% chance of the Bills playing the Lions again next preseason, assuming the preseason opponent selection process is random. There are (as ieatcrayonz pointed out) 31 other teams against whom the Bills can play preseason games. The Bills typically play four preseason games each year, and never play the same team twice in the same preseason. We know that four teams (out of a total of 31) will be selected as Bills preseason opponents. The odds of playing any specific team during a specific preseason are 4/31, just like ieatcrayonz said. The probability of playing that same team two years in a row is 4/31 * 4/31, for the same reason that the probability of getting heads twice in a row is 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4. The probability of playing the same team for five consecutive years is (4/31)^5, also like ieatcrayonz said. From start to finish I cannot find a single statistical statement he made to which anyone can reasonably object.

I agree that cost cutting is probably an important part of the equation. But there's more to the story than just that. The Bills are a rebuilding team. If the Bills were to cut McGee, it would afford their younger players more playing time; and would free up a roster spot for a younger player. The Bills are at least two years away from being a serious threat to go deep into the playoffs. By then, most of whatever value McGee as a player has will have faded. Let's say hypothetically speaking that McGee is one of the five best CBs for this year's team; and that cutting him costs the Bills one win they otherwise would have had. That extra loss could significantly improve the Bills' draft position, potentially enabling them to take a franchise QB with their first pick. Obtaining a franchise QB is the one step most necessary to convert the Bills from a perpetual pretender into a consistent contender. It's important to envision the kind of team you want the Bills to have three years from now, and to ask yourself what role, if any, you'd envision for McGee on that future team.

I agree with the main point of your post; which is that Spiller's contributions thus far have been underwhelming. Obviously he has a very long way to go before he even begins to justify his top-10 draft status. Hopefully he makes good progress this season. But IMO, there's a lot more wrong with this offense than Spiller's contribution, or lack thereof. You have to look at Fitz's lack of consistent accuracy, the OL's problems with blocking, and dropped passes by WRs. If the Bills had a franchise QB, a LT who could block a DE without help from his TE, a good TE, and a solid, reliable receiving corps, the offense would do just fine, either with or without a water bug. The offense already has a good RB in the form of an underrated Fred Jackson. Then, if Spiller were to become the Thurman Thomas-like player the Bills were obviously hoping for when they drafted him, he would enhance an offense which was already successful.

As people have pointed out, there is no Drew Brees on this roster. It's also worth noting that in order to get its real QB of the future, San Diego had to lose enough games to get the first overall pick. They then used that pick on Eli Manning. Then San Diego and NY Giants did that draft day swap which resulted in the Giants getting Manning, and the Chargers getting Rivers and significant other compensation. Similarly, the Bills will also likely require some very early first round draft picks if they are to attain San Diego's level.

Agreed. Any time you have an NT who's 370+ pounds, most or all of which looks to be muscle, the word "upside" almost has to come to mind. I'll grant that Jasper is raw even by the standards of sushi chefs. But clearly he has "upside" written all over him.

I think you can build an offense around many-play drives. The 49ers offense of the '80s was like this. But to have an offense like that you need consistency. The bread and butter play of that 49ers offense was the quick slant to Jerry Rice. To make that play work as intended, Jerry Rice had to run a perfect route, and Joe Montana had to hit him in perfect stride. Also their OL had to provide reasonably good pass protection. The more things which are wrong with your offense, the more likely it is that something bad will happen to disrupt the intended many-play drive. A bad OL means holding penalties, hurried throws, and sacks. A bad or inconsistent QB means more incompletions, or passes that fail to achieve the needed YAC. Questionable talent at WR means dropped passes and coverage sacks. On a scale of 1 - 10, I'd rate the Bills' OL at about a 2, and Fitz at about a 4. Obviously both those things need to change for the Bills offense to consistently execute many-play drives. The Bills are very unlikely to add a franchise QB or Pro Bowl offensive linemen for this season, so improvements to the offense will have to wait until 2012. The 2011 draft was used on the defense, and I expect to see noticeable improvements there.

As others in this thread have pointed out, it's a bit premature to be certain about whether the Bills will pick first overall. That being said, I'd like to see them end up with Luck or with some other franchise QB. Filling that need is critical enough that I'd even be willing to see them trade up if needed to get the right QB. A dream scenario would be for the Bills to use an early first round pick on a franchise QB. Then they'd package their second and third round picks to trade back into the first for a LT. I realize that's a little late in the first to be taking a LT, but this is a dream scenario after all! I realize this still leaves a hole at RT, but it's not as though all the Bills' needs can be filled in one draft. The first round QB should remain on the bench his rookie year, with no thought whatever of putting him into a regular season game unless both Fitz and Thigpen are each missing a limb! Fitz is good enough to get the team by for the short-term, and you want to give the rookie a chance to learn the offense before throwing him to the wolves. You also want to significantly improve the OL between now and when that rookie makes his first start.

Agreed. Just to add to what you've written: if Nix gets rid of Spiller, he will (presumably) become a lot more open to the idea of using another first round pick on a "waterbug" back for Gailey's offense. The longer it takes before that happens, the better. And who knows? Maybe Spiller or some other back will become the waterbug Gailey is looking for, without the Bills having to invest yet another first round pick into the position.

In response to your point about OLs, I'd argue several things: First, that it's very rare to see a complete team in today's NFL. Just about every team is going to have its share of holes, including this year's Super Bowl participants. In the case of those two teams, some of the holes happened to be on the OL. Second, I'd argue that both Green Bay and Pittsburgh have quarterbacks who are excellent at masking the flaws of a bad OL. Aaron Rodgers gets the ball out very quickly, and is elusive. Ben Roethlisberger is mobile, and is very tough for defenders to haul down because of his sheer size and strength. Both players are among the very best in the league at masking the flaws of a bad OL. They're both significantly better at that aspect of the game than (for example) Peyton Manning or Tom Brady. The Bills obviously need a franchise QB. But most franchise QBs require significantly more pass protection than do Rodgers or Manning. A franchise QB + good pass protection is a very potent combination, which is why it's so important to build a good OL.

I would argue that when Atlanta "bottomed out" as you put it, there was considerably more talent on the roster than their poor record indicated. But they were being held back by very serious problems at the quarterback position. Problems there can kill your record, no matter how good you are elsewhere. Even the Ravens of 2000 went 2-3 during that five game stretch when their offense failed to score a touchdown. That lack of touchdowns was due to Tony Banks stinking, and Trent Dilfer not playing his best when he first assumed the role of starter. If even a team with as much talent as the Ravens of 2000 can have a losing record when their quarterback play is bad enough, surely this is also true of the Falcons. Joey Harrington's poor play meant that whatever talent the Falcons had at other positions would not result in very many wins. Fixing the problem at QB allowed the true impact of the Falcons' strength in other areas to be felt. From a rebuilding standpoint, a lousy record with lots of talent at other positions and a big gaping hole at QB is not the same thing as an equally lousy record for a team with little young talent anywhere. The Dolphins' playoff year was based on several factors: The Patriots had an off year that year. Lucky breaks. Their season felt a lot like Jauron's one good season with Chicago. A gimmicky wildcat offense. Chad Pennington's very solid play at the quarterback position. Nothing on that list proved sustainable. After the Dolphins' one good year, the Patriots got back on track, the lucky breaks and bounces tapered off, defenses got better at dealing with the wildcat, and Chad Pennington soon became injured, and then retired. After Jauron's one good season in Chicago, his team was obliterated in the first playoff game it played. The same thing happened to that Dolphins team in their playoff game. Both teams were exposed not merely as inferior to their opponents, but as not even in the same category as the teams they faced. Neither team made the playoffs the next year. A season like that isn't "rebuilding," it's a flash in the pan.

From a drafting standpoint, most of what Nix has done seems to have been legitimate, or at very least plausible. The second rounder on Troup is legitimate if he continues to become a solid NT. This year's second rounder on a CB is legitimate if he becomes a good starter. The Bills had a need at CB, and getting a good starter from an early second round pick is good value. My main concern is obviously the Spiller pick. That's a huge investment in the RB position, with no obvious need to invest any early picks there at all. If Spiller becomes the next Thurman Thomas then you could justify it. But odds seem to be against that happening. Nix inherited a team with very few real answers on offense or defense. The long-term solutions on offense included Stevie Johnson, maybe Levitre and Wood, and possibly Fred Jackson. (Though age is a concern there.) On defense, the long-term answers he inherited consisted of Kyle Williams, and arguably some talent at safety such as George Wilson. That's less talent than I'd expect an expansion team to have after its first draft and full offseason. When a team has this many holes, it's hard to address them all in just two years.

Once we get a franchise quarterback. Without one, everything else the Bills do will not result in a Super Bowl win.

It's true that not every franchise quarterback is taken in the first round. Since the year 2000, how many franchise QBs have been taken in rounds 2 - 7, or as UDFAs? Let's see if I miss anyone . . . 2nd round: Drew Brees, 32nd overall 3rd round: Matt Schaub 4th round: nobody 5th round: nobody 6th round: Tom Brady 7th round: nobody UDFAs: nobody That's three players--three!--over the last ten+ years. That's 0.009 players per team per year. On average, a typical NFL team will acquire a non-first round franchise QB once every 106 years. Forgive me if I seem a bit impatient, but . . . Edit: the Patriots had two 5th round picks back in the 2000 draft. The first of those picks was used on a TE by the name of Dave Stachelski. Stachelski's NFL career was two seasons long, and included zero starts. Their second 5th round pick was used on Jeff Marriott, for whom no position is listed, and who apparently didn't make the Patriots' final roster. The Patriots also had two picks in the sixth round of the 2000 draft. The first of those two picks was used on Antwan Harris, a cornerback whose NFL career lasted six seasons, and included two starts. The second of the Patriots' two sixth round picks was used on Tom Brady. Maybe the Patriots are better at talent evaluation than most other teams, thereby giving their later round picks a higher than normal chance to work out. But it would be extremely foolish to rely on a strategy like this to find the next franchise quarterback. Late round picks are a lot like lottery tickets. Most of the time when you scratch away that silver coating, you find you've picked a Stachelski or a Marriott. Even on those rare occasions when you pick a winner, there's no telling which position that winner will happen to play.