port allegany

I too appreciate the administration of this site and check in often. However, the Chat Room can't be the ONLY way. Can we not have the traditional link AND the chat room and people can choose the one they prefer. I do prefer seeing the comment linkages that you don't get with the chat room. Thanks.

At first glance I would agree with you but in the back of my mind was a conversation I heard on a football show with about 3 or 4 ex-players. They were talking about how important the OL was and how a special a certain OL player (probably a LT but I don't recall) might turn out to be for some team. Then the moderater posed the question, "So if you had a chance to get a great LT or a great RB which would you select?". Immediately and unanimously the players said, "RB". The moderater, and me, was puzzled given the discussion preceding the question where it sounded like the OL was the crucial element for an offense (they all agreed prior that the QB was "IT" and went on). The players all said something to the effect, a great RB makes everybody better; by his very presence and a great play by him could result in points where as the great LT enables great 'skill' players opportunties. So, maybe the Bills see Spiller as the 'great' player that other teams will have to scheme for because he is dangerous with the ball.

I share some of your optimism. I'm hoping for a very competitive 'one year away' type performance. Here's why: 1. I do agree the coaching will be better, particularly on the offense. Gailey has done it at the NFL level and we haven't had someone like that in almost a decade. 2. Gailey has some weapons - Evans, Spiller, Nelson, a couple of RBs, and Parrish - that can be exploited better than in the past. Edwards HAS to play better than last year overall. Remember, he has a good start and then it fell apart. In fact, the entire offense fell apart. 3. The OL is a year older, stronger, and wiser. It can't possibly have as many injuries again or as much inexperience. A new game plan can minimize the protection problems (again, I am counting on Gailey and his experience exceeding Van Pelt, but I feel that's a safe bet). I think that's one of the reasons they got Spiller. And if the Tight Ends improve (both were young with upside last year) that will help Edwards. Remember, Edwards was pretty good with Schouman (spelling?) in the line-up. Obviously, he likes to checkdown but he needs quality to checkdown to. Spiller and the TEs might provide the quality 4. The defense is stouter and stronger. Right now we are projecting a starting line-up without Kelsey, Schobel, or Johnson (DL). Those guys are still on the team (assuming Schobel comes back) so depth will be better. 5. Maybin has talent. Maybe he doesn't have a position in the NFL but if he does it's likely OLB. If it is and he blossoms up to his talent, we just filled another need with a #1 round draft choice. 6. It is a last place schedule against the NFC North. Yes, the AFC West and the NFC West are worst but the NFC North is not that much better.

I'd like a playoff as well but this argument that TCU deserves it more than Texas is just plain wrong. TCU plays a much easier schedule and always plays the underdog role whenever it plays a 'major conference' team. Two years ago (2007), TCU played Texas in the second or third week when both were still undefeated. All the writers were saying how it would be the game that showed how far the second tier programs have come. TCU supposively had its 'best team' in 40 years. The result: it was a rout. The score, 35-13, was much, much closer than the game. Case closed. When Boise St. or TCU plays a 'big boy' when the 'big boy' has something major to lose, they get thumped. When the emotions going into the game are lopsided ("here's our chance to show the world" versus "this isn't the bowl we hoped for"), then TCU and Boise St. do well. They are certainly capable of pulling an upset. But put them into one of the major conferences, and they are 7-5 or 8-4, good but not world beaters.

Great research - thanks. However, it is just a mathematical average and more than a few of these 1st round QBs have been close to a bust (Alex Smith, Brady Quinn, the Oakland #1 QB) or a bust (JP is not on the list, nor is Akai Smith, Ryan Leaf, .... you know the list). While I agree if we get a dynamite, sure thing (at least in the scouts' mind) - then, yes, take him. However, this year all the QBs have significant flaws. If Brohm was coming out of Louisville THIS YEAR, where would he go? 1st or 2nd round probably - let's make him our 'franchise QB' pick this year and see if we can develop him. Why? First, the others actually in the draft aren't significantly better. Second, we have other needs on this team. And third, and most importantly, we really don't have time to develop a QB. It's been 10 years AND the 'core' players are getting older to the point that in 3 years we'll be retooling again (think Evans, Stroud, McGee, Schobel, and even the younger starters will be nearing 30). Our best hope is to find a 'serviceable QB' (not a career back-up but a Pennington-type, an Orten, someone that has started and had some success - not much or they wouldn't be available but some) as a 2 year stop gap and build the rest of the team. And hope Brohm or we hit magic with some 4th rounder but not risk a 1st round bust again. We can't afford losing another 1st round talent, the Top 8 salary cap hit, or, frankly, time.

"minus the Maybin blunder" - how can you give a person a pass for "blundering" on the 11th overall pick? That's a little like "except for that one incidence, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?" If you think Maybin was a good pick for future years, then I can see your logic. Personally, I think he will be. But if you truly think it was a 'blunder' and Maybin will be a bust, then why in the world would you want this person picking higher and betting even more money? Just curiious about your thinking here.

Jauron has now had 4 pre-seasons, 4 drafts, 3.25 seasons, etc. to put something together. We fire the OC THIS YEAR, we elevate AVP with not only zero OC experience but almost zero NFL coaching experience. This is the 4th, not 1st, year. We don't have an offense for whatever reason - we just don't have one. The defense can't get off the field and/or melts at crucial times. Folks, this is coaching problems. It may also be GM issues as well. But why retain Dick Jauron? Unless you feel the team will turn it around in the next 12 games, there is no need to continue to work within this framework. As the definition of insanity often attributed Einstein goes, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, yet expecting a different result." Let's get someone else in here with a different perspective. Maybe they'll play different players. Maybe a different game plan. Anything different at this point might help us down the line. More DJ and more of his coaches, well we know what that gets.

I did not say Curry, Raji, or Crabtree WOULD fall to us but that there seems to be a consensus that these 3 will be very good NFL players and not potential reach like the DE, TE, or the QBs. If you can get a real talent at 11 you should get him and work it out over the next year. To match Crabtree with Evans makes WR a real position of strength. How many teams have 2 'shut down corners." It seemed to work for Arizona this year and the Colts (two #1s in Harrison and Wayne). As it was once said, "football is not about 11 offense players beating 11 defensive players. Football is 11 offensive players attacking ONE defensive weakness." I'm not saying Crabtree or Curry will fall but if they do - grab talent.

On the upside - perhaps Seattle passes on Crabtree and he falls to us. That would give us another 'solid' choice along with Raji and Curry. Everyone else, outside of the OTs, are a bit more risky.

Last night's game was a real low point for me. I've followed the Bills for almost 40 years from multiple states. What did me in was the deja vu element of Super Bowl XXV. Not the 'wide right' but the philosophy of the coaching staff. Just like last night, we had time in the Super Bowl to get closer but decided not to risk it and set up a 47 yard field goal. That's not coaching, that's laying the blame on someone else. A 47 yd field goal isn't a gimmee and it's NOT a risk you should be willing to settle for with a Championship or a season on the line. Both coaches (Levy & Jauron - ironic Levy hired Jauron, isn't it?) showed no confidence in the QB or their players or their ability to call the right play at a clutch moment. Norwood nor Lindell didn't blow it, their coaches froze. They decided to 'pray' instead of 'play'. Very nice people, both of them. Excellent minds. But I'm afraid not quite 'championship' material. They can do a great job of keeping a team together (what Marv did for 4 years was outstanding and Jauron kept the team together last year) but when faced with an equal or superior opponent their philosophies of reaching but not grabbing the moment comes up short. Jauron missed a great opportunity to motivate this team. Let's say he throws a few screens, short passes, maybe a longer strike to seal the game, an endaround, or something beside 3 straight runs and FAILS to advance the ball. He goes back to the locker room and press conference and says, 'hey, I believe in these guys. They didn't get it done tonight but I know these guys will get it done more often than not in the future so I have no problems trying to win this game with these guys. Trent had a poor game - just like all the hall-of-famers did - yet he had us in position to win the game despite the bad start. I wanted the game on HIS shoulders. He's won final drive games before and he will many times in the future. I'm sure others will say, 'you should have let your OUTSTANDING kicker finish the game' but while we do have an OUTSTANDING kicker we also have an outstanding team that will win these game. That I can promise you." He'd be a hero in the locker room. But now what do we have after last night - a QB with a shaky confidence that was REINFORCED not supported by the coaching staff and a kicker that now wears a "Wide Right' necklase. Terrible coaching philosophy by a very good man. Sad all the way around.

I realize this board is a little on the negative side but we're throwing in the towel a little early here. Yes, the Bills lost 3 in a row. But they lost to NE in NE, Miami in Miami (and we have to now admit they are better than anticipated), and the Jets here. If we take care of home field and go 2-1 in the rematches and win some very winnable games in the next few weeks, we'll be right in the thick of it. Can the running game continue to be so bad? Unlikely. Edwards is only a 2yr QB - it's ridiculous to put the team on his shoulders. With a running game, he'll be fine again. The defense just can't get turnovers and, thus, get off the field. We are not that far away. Hang in there - it's a long season and we're 5-4 with an advantageous schedule to play. 10-6 is certainly possible, 9-7 likely (unless we really are the team of the last 3 weeks).

Just curious - why all the love for Albert. While I've read the rare athletic ability, almost every site questions his toughness and dedication. It sound very much like D'Brick from the Jets that we all were hoping to get in that draft. And, dare I say, a lot like Mike Williams. It seems O-lineman need to like to play physical.

BINGO. Could not have said it better.[ quote name=Bagel' date='Apr 12 2008, 07:38 PM' post='1003479] I can think of nine good reasons why Trent chose Stanford. 1. NFL. Stanford is a pipeline to the NFL. In the last 10 years Stanford has had 35 players drafted by the NFL -- second most in the Pac-10 behind USC. Since 2002, Trent's freshman red-shirt season, they have had 26 players drafted. 2. Academics. Stanford is the finest academic institution in the United States. This is not a four year decision. It is a forty year decision. 3. Quarterback U. Stanford has a storied football tradition, producing quarterbacks such as John Elway, Jim Plunkett and John Brodie. An article in 2005 addressing this topic declared that Stanford has produced more pro-quality quarterbacks since 1960 than any other school in the country (Notre Dame, USC, LSU and Florida State rounded out the top five). 4. Location. The Stanford campus is gorgeous and the weather in Palo Alto is sunny and warm nearly year round. It is also only 40 minutes from San Francisco and a few miles from the beach. 5. Coeds. The Stanford women’s volleyball team and swim team. Trust me on this one. 6. Athletics. Overall the Stanford athletic department is dominant, winning the Director’s Cup as the nation’s top Division I athletic program 13 years in a row (and leading again this year). 7. Conference. Stanford plays in the Pac-10, an excellent football conference that is quarterback friendly. 8. Recent History. When Trent was being recruited, Stanford had been to bowl games six of the previous ten seasons (including the Rose Bowl in 1999, Stanford’s twelfth Rose Bowl appearance). 9. Extra Guidance. In addition to the coaching staff, at Stanford Trent could and did seek guidance from Bill Walsh.

29th is too far down. There could easily be a 'run' on WR between 11 and 28 and then we are left with our 5th choice. I like the idea of moving down but we need to get one of our top 3 WR (assuming that the Bills think their top 3 are interchangeable). It' nice to accumulate picks (it not only adds bodies but improves the odds that a player or two will outperform their draft position), but the point is to get the best players.