colin

to me the contracts are what they are: no one is coming cheap so you have to pay up. that said, we added two big time run blockers (again look at how the skins ran against dock and how the faiders went going right) to an O that has some bigtime speed at wideout and a quick QB. all we are left with is a hole at rb, and i think a good rb will play even better than he is on our team with that line, particularly if he has some speed (why imo mcgahee was expendable). so for me it is about what picks we give up. if we can still have 3 day one picks, and land a guy like willis, and get turner then i'd consider that solid. if it costs us a shot at a good LB then i don't think so.

last season we lost milloy sam adams vincent posey mike williams losing them didn't really hurt us. frankly i expect the only guy we will miss to be nate. our running game wasn't good, so missing mcgahee won't make a big negative impact, and on d those guys didn't perform that well. we have added 2 solid big men to each line and our young team has one more year coming together. i expect us to be better

he won the butkis and was the best player on a team. he made big impacts in the sec, he looks day one pro ready. a more physical vilma

i don't think the bills pass on peterson unless someone offers the world (like GB giving up 1st, second and perhaps more). if peterson does fall to us, i see us trading back up into the 1st and getting a solid LB if available. with some (a lot) luck we might nab a falling peterson and willis. that might leave us with only one additional day one pick tho, but we could use that on the best CB, DT, or LB on the board then.

there is ALWAYS a run on a position in every draft, sometimes more than one position. last year it was DBs and pass rushers. guys went entire rounds ahead of where the mag people had them projected. if willis goes early lbs will get run on, if ANY db goes top 8 then dbs will get run on. i think it is most likely that all d line will get snapped up early. the 2 or 3 top pass rushers will get nabbed way early, then branch and okoy, then next level guys like carriker and so on. a run on dbs and d line would be great for us, we'd get the best lb or rb in the nation, and perhaps have a big trade down chance.

one game wouldn't hurt

donkos are a paper tiger fo sho. the one thing that leads to consistent winning in the nfl is good qb and passing play. that requires a good solid qb and a decent line (pass and run blocking) don't think denver has both of those

imo the true lowest risk pick is CB (i mean in general compared to other positions). you get very few true busts at cb compared to all other positions. jammer and newman were considered dissapointments but ended up as pretty solid cbs. buchanan and smoot disapointed, but still performed pretty well, at least at times. i don't want us to take a cb 1st by any means, but if we take 1 day one it prolly isn't the worst thing in the world. if we can make up for clements loss we will have had an very outstanding offseason.

we have a chance because teams ahead of us might want to stay put and get a de, lt, s, wr or qb. i'd love to see us trade out AP and get picks to get us willis and lynch

we are weaker at corner but IMO flat at secondary overall. if we draft a solid young lb and anyone for the DL we are a good bit better on the front 7 our biggest weakness has been a horrible O, poor short yardage game, not enough production consistantly from our passing game, and an inability to control the LOS. entering every single season for the past 10+ years we've been weak at LT. we have been HORRIBLE at LG since rubes left. now we have a solid (and by many accounts top 5 or 6) LT, a kick ass LG, and with the kid from the raiders we have a RG as well. this is the best our O has been for a while

if ap is there i think we might pull off a super draft double: 1. trade down with someone who wants ap (get about 5-10 spots lower and a 2nd) 2. pick up willis/whoever at our new spot 3. trade up with our 2 2nds or a combo of 2nds and 3rds and get marshaun or whoever falls that far.

mcgayhee reminds me of mike tyson after he started falling off. he used to use his explosiveness so much that everything else he did was based on that, just like tyson used his ability to mix up knockout punches. as soon as tyson lost his bobbing and weaving ability his power was much less effective -- now that willis lost his turbo charge he really doesn't seem to be able to use the rest of his skills as well as he could of. our o would be perfect for a mix up of a power and speed back, or an all purpose guy like marshawn lynch. i'm not really worried about losing willis, there are prolly 6 young guys coming out of the ncaa this draft who could give us more than 1k and 4.0 per carry, maybe a lot more.

we can get a small quick LB, or perhaps draft one with real potential. we cannot just up and nab an OG ready to maul in the run game. the bills decided that a fast D that keeps teams from scoring (which they were pretty good at last year) and a run game that can control the game late is better than what we could have had on D. i think they are right. you can plug in fast hungry guys on D along with a good mix of players and end up with an effective D. a good o line takes a few studs, good team play, and good overall ability and toughness. i think we have a good mix of young vets on our o line for the first time since 88

this is pretty damn negative right here. what the bills are doing is simple: they are stocking up by unit not by position. we have plenty of WRs (a big one or TE would round it out to a top unit in the whole NFL) we have a good young qb we have a decent secondary (lost a great one, but have 2 young safeties and 2 young cbs, better than most) a healthy tko makes our lb pretty good, but i think we draft that kid from the sec who gets all over the place. our dline lacks size/run stopping but we have the mccargo who was well thought of last year and will prolly jam another dt in there. we are very good at de our rb situation could be better, but i think we have plenty of outs and willis in a contract year might just kill some fools. clearly we went crazy on o line yesterday. we had a crap line, after the bye it was decent. we now have a couple straight studs on the left, a decent C, and some size and ability on the right. all young, and we added depth (these guys ALWAYS get banged up, you never go 16 without having a lineman go down). you can B word about this player or that player, but the team plays together. our whole ability to pass and run and dictate the pace of the game and MOST IMPORTANTLY to mash people up in the red zone and on 3rd and short. if this line performs as well is at can we have an advantage that pretty much has been the one constant throughout football history: if you can whip them in the trenches you can whip them anywhere

have you seen what other 2 and 3 year day 1 DE picks are getting paid? check out what the kid from GB and the kid from KC are getting (isn't the kid in KC getting franchised?) also the kid on the titans. carter went to DC and howard went to philly for even bigger contracts. while they might be superior to kelsey it would not take much for kelsay to pass them this season, and all the above contracts set the price for kelsey. what matters is if he can be a bigger time player this season

i think CBs are a much hotter position in the nfl than before, so the lowest rated DB or CB might still go pretty high. last draft we had no true top notch corners, but dbs went all over the high end of the board (including 7,8, and low double digit picks). cbs are rare and tend to contribute pretty well as rooks which makes them covoted picks. the last draft i can remember with cbs being rated low was in 01 when clements went to us in the 20s, and i think about 75% of gms would have taken him if they had another chance in that draft. dbs will always go high so we might get a player to slip or a team to trade up to us.

i am up and down on this. the corner (next to possibly the left tackle and pass rushing end -- but these are only one per team each) is the hardest position to fill in football. it seems to me teams are moving to cover 2 because instead of letting teams pick on your weakest link easily it allows you to use scheme to protect weak cover guys (considering there are only about 5 or 10 lock down corners many teams need this). when we had baily and clements back there we had top top corners. this allowed our D to be very strong -- but it was just as strong with mcgee and clements with vincent at FS. i do remember wire getting toasted often tho, even when our corners blanketed the wrs of the other team. i think (hope) that with some good planning our secondary will play more like an O line (compliment of several guys) instead of just individuals with the weakest of them getting picked on. all that said, i'd like to keep clements

good points all around. we need: a corner if we lose nate ( i hope we don't) at least one new starting LB at least 1 new DT/DE (i think we will get one of each, but perhaps can do a 2nd or 3rd rounder on one) at least 1 new starting interior O line at least 1 new BIG WR/TE. i think an other RB i think we should keep nate, get A thomas from balti (i think he will be a big impact guy, and having him and moving TKO inside gives us big strong fast LBs that will be VERY effective against short passing and the run) get a solid guard (i'm thinking steinbach, but really we could get any number of guys and improve, even a day 1 rook). the biggest thing for me is to get our run d improved (mcargo back, a guy like terdison in FA, and an upgrade in LB will be plenty) and not to have a massive hole in our secondary. everything else is gravy that will directly to improving our team.

good work. i suggest putting in the team and possy of each player. do you really think/want the bills to pass on the DTs and LBs on the board at their pick?

another rocket surgeon!! i didn't say these women are whores anymore than willis is a lowlife. i said it's their choice (they chose to have the baby, women have a right to choose in this country you know) to have the kid. their choice = their baby. simple

td cost us rueben, moulds, and pat williams. if we had them, and perhaps travis to go along with willis (that is a longer shot tho) we'd be in the playoffs right now.

it's the woman's body and she has the right to choose, case closed.

i've certainly called him a fool a number of times, i just think the idea that he is a low life because he has out of wedlock kids is dumb. he's a dumb jock who loves to get laid and is a sucker for every woman who wants to get pregnant or is too dumb not too. what bothers me is the self rightious posturing by goofs like the guy i quoted above (not you) who think that all women must be perfect creatures of virtue just becuase they can barely get any and feel beyond greatful for any woman with poor enough judgement to let them pop a cork in them.

don't be such a pc kitty. these women are grown up and know about birth control. they also have the right to choose, and chose to have the child. they also knew they were sleeping with a pro athlete with a big reputation as a hurricane and massive income potential. they are now getting a paycheck for 18+ years. instead of waving around your little good guy badge why don't you take a look at this funny place called reality?

i think willis is a poor decision maker and too carefree with impregnating these women, but i blame them more than him. these women chose to have sex with willis, chose not to use protection, and then chose to have the child. it is their choice, not willis' to have these kids and IMO they are prolly doing it to get a paycheck from a sports star. far from a lowlife, he just has sex with the wrong girls.