Pyrite Gal

The key to analysis here is not to be impressed or depressed about a specific move (following this approach leads only to madness) but to only be impressed or depressed by the draft as a whole. One can easily agree or disagree with a specific move in the 2006 draft, but overall I do not see how anyone can reasonably be anything but incredibly psyched and impressed by this draft. Of the 9 players chosen, 8 (and I mean amazingly EIGHT) of them got starts for this team. This is an incredible number in terms of getting production from the players chosen given that one is given the players this Bills braintrust inherited from the TD reign of error. Sure, it is simply the fact that folks such as Merz and Pennington got starts but the fact is they are no longer Bills, but even producing 5 of 9 players who proved to be starters on a 4-1 team 3 years later is such phenomenal drafting that it is virtually jaw dropping in how impressive it is. If one wants to look deeper, one of those 2 remaining non-starters on the depth chart is Ashton Youbouty who as the nickel is as close to starting as one can get. Is there another team in the NFL which has produced a 2/3 success rate in producing starters 3 years after a draft (more diligent heads than mine can tell us whether this is true but I cannot think of another team. In fact, there are probably drafts where 5 years after the fact virtually 100% of the players chosen are simply gone from the team which picked them. Consideration in this light actually probably gives the greatest indictment of McCargo as of the 9 players chosen in 2006, one and only one has not proved to be good enough to log even one start. That is John McCargo. Its not like he never got the chance. Fellow rookie Kyle Williams is the starter at DT with Stroud so it is clear that McCargo had a direct opportunity to start immediately and earn his version of an extension that Williams won, Its not like the Bills have been so solid at DT with Williams that there was no room for McCargo to shine as this team has shipped in and shipped out Larry Triplett at DT during this period. He has not met expectations to say the least. Yet, overall I think that taking the route as a fan of not getting too bummed out or excited about any individual player is the way to go here since focus on mccargo overshadows the fact that not only were 8 of 9 players from this draft capable of starting in the NFL even the laggard Mccargo has produced at least one multi-sack game. IMHO, the 2005 draft was 100% productive for the Bills. I am impressed.

On target! The talk of cutting him now or next year (and probably even the year after that are simply born out of frustration that the lead problem on Sunday was simply lack of defensive pressure. The Edwards injury, the McGee/Simpson injury, and other factors certainly contributed to a greater or lesser degree, but all of these factors at worst were so small compared to the negative impact of the lack of pressure they are not even worth mentioning without talking a lot about the lack of pressure on Warner. I know that for some folks it is all about the QB and they are almost psychotically addicted to chewing over the latest QB controversy, but that and the DB injuries are so NOT the story regarding the demolition Sunday that it does a disservice to even pretend they were the prime factor.

Bingo we have a winner here. The game was decided not by McGee (and then even Simpson) going down. There was simply a lack of pressure, sacks and most of all turnovers which come from the pressure. This was a team AZ which has tons of fumbles and INTs by Warner under pressure from the Jets. This lack of pressure was the story of this game.

I think the difference between JP and Edwards is extremely good at making reads and acting quickly to make throws on reads he makes before the play even begins. JP on the other hand rather than having developed in this proactive style was trained and actually plays quite well in a reactive style. Particularly at Tulane and its turnstyle OL he was running for his life READING the play as he did this and reacting effectively enough that even behind this NOline he produced well enough that he was a consensus first round choice. He was evaluated pretty clearly as not being the QB prospect of the first three QBs taken in that draft, but seemed to be better than the rest of the QB field. I think folks are making a mistake when they jump to the conclusion that JP cannot read plays, has limited football sense or that he is football stupid because cannot make read act in the proactive manner Edwards does. JP has demonstrated a pretty unique ability to make athletic plays and still keep looking down the field while he is doing this (a real-world example most folks remember is a play last year where Fowler hiked the ball over his head and JP not only caught the ball on the bounce (an athletic feat given the oddly shaped ball and defenders with the play in front of them closing in for the kill), but even better he made this catch while looking down the field and he saw Gaines break free on this busted play. He not only did incredible multi-tasking catching the bouncing ball without looking and keeping his eyes downfield but then threw an accurate pass (a little high but Gaines made the catch so it was accurate enough) which Gaines hauled in for the first down. On this play JP exhibited a good ability to read the play and know where everyone was headed roughly (it was a busted play rather than a timed play so he and Gaines had very good chemistry) and he avoided any defenders even having a shot at this ball thrown under extreme duress. I think folks somehow drawing the conclusion that JP cannot make reads before the play are also shown to be wrong on the numerous long strikes JP has thrown to Evans. On these plays, JP clearly knows exactly where he is going with the ball before the play even starts as he has to release the ball well before Evans is in the spot to catch it, and JP makes the read that there is a good shot Evans is going to get to the designated spot well before the defender and he has shown incredible skill in hitting Evans in stride like on the long TD yesterday. Does this mean that JP is the right QB for the Bills? NO. Our O style which we rode to a 4-0 start is built around a proactive style which is not JP's style. Does this mean that the Bills should alter their style to fit JP? NO. I prefer the WCO style perfected by Walsh/Montana over the reactive style perfected by Holmgren/Favre myself. I think the Bills (TD,GW,MM in particular) blew it when they attempted however to mold JP (not a Favre but a Favre type) into being a read and react rather than a run and react QB. At this point it does not matter if we alter our style because JP has raised frustrations so high among fans who saw this him fail to master a style that is not him and even worse fall victim to a newsmedia happy to lambaste a QB so they can sell ads that I am pretty certain JP is done as a Bill. It is perfectly understandable to me that many fans would jump to the false conclusion (IMHO) that JP is football stupid because he cannot play in the proactive style called for in the Fairchild nonfense and now amped up in the Turk offense. Football is simply a game which really does not require the level of attention I am others give to it in order to enjoy it. However, anyone who purports to actually understand the game should also reflect the conclusion that in reality JP does a number of things incredibly well. The problem for us is that they are not the things we want from a QB to run our WCO-type offense. If JP is smart enough to sign with a team which runs a more appropriate offense for his style of play AND he is lucky enough not to get hurt (as we saw with TE's concussion yesterday and Wilfork's dirty hit last year any QB is at risk, I think he can do quite fine elsewhere. The thing which is amusing to me is that some folks seem to find it impossible to like both Edwards and his game and Losman and his game at the same time. Both can work but the Bills seem to me to have made a clear decision to go with the WCO Edwards style. I think this is the right decision but anyone who pays too much attention to this game as I do also should understand that it is not an unreasonable chance that JP will prove to be unusual for Bills players in that I think he can do quite well if he gets into the right situation. He is not sure thing (like any NFL QB prospect likely he won't prove to be a consistent miracle worker elsewhere) and this is why it would be dumb for any team to trade value to get him when one can sign him to a make-good contract this coming FA season.

Help me Spock! As I said I am computo illiterate.

I tried to set this up as a poll with a simple yes or not answer and then I am curious what folks reasoning is. I have not done a poll in this format so my apologies if I messed it up and I would be overjoyed if someone with more computo skills did it instead if I mess it up. I vote no, because he does not meet my definition of injury prone yet. However, tjhe scary thing is that I think he is really close to meeting my definition and that is a real worry for this fan. For me, a player is injury prone when his style of play and something about his body causes him to miss playing time for a variety of injuries from hits that I have seen other players shake off an walk away from. A player may miss PT in my book because a old injury recurs or the original injury is not repaired properly but I still would not consider him injury prone as he doesn't come down with a variety of injuries from relatively standard hits. Jim Kelly had recurring bursa sack problems but between padding, an ability to tough his way through pain and a willingness to cortisone up I would not call him injury prone. RJ on the other hand is the classic real world definition of injury prone. He was a gutsy athletic player for sure, but his gutsiness and escapability got him hit often enough and led to him missing PT for concussion, shoulder separation, deep bruises and even an injury to his chest from falling on the point of the ball that I easily label him as injury prone. The concussion suffered by Edwards today is problematic to me since for the third time in his brief and shining career he was lost PT due to injury. One was for the wrist last year and a second was an injury which cost him a pre-season game. Today it was a concussion from a wicked hit, but as much credit as I give him for hanging in there and completing the pass, I think the team would have been better off if he ducked and covered and took a loss rather than hitting the pass but leaving himself exposed. I thought he took the hit fine but did not protect himself well enough in the fall and I think got concussed not from the hit but from his head hitting the ground. I think it is too early to label Edwards as injury prone, but particularly given he had a record of missing PT due to injury in college, if he has another hit from issed PT this year ane eveb next year I think he will deserve to be called injury prone.

I do not think it is so much that Schobel has suddenly gotten bad (that is not knowing for sure whether there is some injury messing with his game now) but my sense is that Schoebel has never played like or really been as good as the classic stud DE we are used to. Schobel has his strengths and probably deserved his Pro Bowl designation of a couple of years back. However, we Bills fans were spoiled by years of watching Bruce Smith not only fit the classic sackmaster definition of a DE but he simply rewrote the standard by being a stud against the run and incredibly athletic so that he deserved not only a double team but even a triple team and the whole offense slid his way making Jeff Wright, Phil Hansen, LBs given a one-on-one shot and DBs picking off poorly thrown passes a field day, Schobel despite his Pro Bowl honors cannot even smell Bruce's jock strap. What does Schobel do well that earned him his Pro Bowl nod: 1. Defines the hard working (often white in this caricature) DE who is relentless in his pursuit. Schobel gets more than his share of sacks, but unlike BS who could choose from a bunch of different initial moves that might flat out beat the opposing OL player, Schobel's MO starting from his rookie year was to get blocked but stick with it and stick with it and if the QB held onto the ball too long or worse for him got flushed by another rusher Schobel was there to pick up the sack while less determined DL players has either given up pushing or been run out of the play. 2. Schobel did not set-up leverage well when he engaged so that he could simply be pushed aside at the point of attack when he was a rookie. However, as he gained more experience he not only weight-trained to increase his strength but got better leverage when he engaged and had far more strength at the point of attack or when he engaged blockers. I think part of the reason why Schobel so impresses fellow players and opposing coaches is that the book on how to beat him as a rookie was fairly simple and widely pursued. He improved himself as a player to invalidate the book every team had ob him and though this was a small improvement I think lots of folks noticed and Schobel got an inordinate amount of thought from opponents as they looked for a new advantage. 3. The Bills switching to the zone blitz under LeBeau/Gray also came at a good time for Schobel's development as not only did he impress his peers with increased strength, but he did this while at the same time actually dropping his actual weight as he simply became more buff. He also added a great skill when he dropped weight as he really took to the added pass coverage duties of the zone blitz. Schobel showed enough athleticism that he not only could fall back in coverage as the zone blitz dictated, but he was quick and agile enough for him to drop back into the mid zone and not just play the short zone. In one pre-season game he picked off a pass deep enough that many LBs might have had trouble making the drop back he did as a DL player. Though he was sometimes overmatched it was not unusual to see Schobel cover a WR in the endzone as part of a redzone zone blitz. from what I have seen Schobel's skills have not declined in an untoward manner, he never has had a variety of great first moves so he is not gonna immediately pressure the QB. The problem I think is that the D scheme has not yet figured out how to get consistent pressure up the middle even though Stroud and Williams occasionally show the ability to do this and without pressure across the DL. Schobel is just an average DE and can be taken on one-on-one.

I like your thinking of looking for a way that the average consumer can work to damage both TW and LIN financially. The problem I see here IMHO is that there is a fight between two negotiating parties NEITHER of whom have the interests of Bills fans or their own customers driving their negotiating. They are "morally" correct in their limited mission stances but are a prime example of how when your motivation is an eye for an eye then both parties end up blind. it is simply too bad for us consumers in our society that our elected officials are not even a part of this negotiation since they are a flawed but simply the best representation of broader societal interests in this fight. Unfortunately, our society has abandoned any sense of societal interests to the marketplace. When one does this eventually one ends up with clusterducks like the Bills product meltdown or the fiscal crisis currently plaguing our country. Overall, I think it is great for government to work MORE like a business. However, the idiots in charge also need to understand that government is not a business. Though it is good to be more businesslike in gaining efficiencies, government SHOULD NOT be like a business in taking the risks with my tax dollars that are an inherent part of running a good business. its OK if the corner hardware store closes as long as I can go to either Wa-Mart or some other hardware store. It is not OK if my school or library goes out of business because it is inefficient and just because a local kid happens to be between 5 and 10 when this happens he does not get educated and later sticks a gun in someone's face because he was not smart enough to see other choices besides crime to get cash in his sorry life. A pox on both TW and LIN in this mess and I will look for every opportunity I can find to do my little bit and encourage others to do their little bit to punish them financially. The lousy thing is that probably the moguls in charge of these entities will get some golden parachute and be rewarded individually for screwing up the bottomlines of these companies.

It sounds like if anyone is making a declaration that they claim is true for all cases then they are simply wrong. I do not have a dish so I do not know, but the several folks I know who have dishes or whatever provider they have do not have a local/national dish distinction. If they have multiple dishes it is for multiple TVs. Any argument which makes a claim that they seem to indicate applies to all cases (often it is because they are basing their claim in supposed fundamental truth) are probably wrong. the more fundamental and all encompassing the claim the more likely it strikes me as a claim which can be ignored.

In general I think this is good advice though in priority order if the first thing we are counting on is stopping Fitz he has gone over 100 yards in each of the last three games catching 7 or 8 passes each time. Containing him rather than stopping him is far more likely a successful goal for our D (though Boldin being out great enhances that possibility though I think the key is actually for us to run disguised zones so that it looks like the over player is giving him lots of room but the under player can close quickly and cut off the pass route. Pressure on Warner will be the key so that he gets rid of it quickly and does not have the time to accurately decide whether we are using the zone blitz or instead using more of a straight cover approach. If we get pressure the turnovers will come.

Bingo. A winner. I agree in great part with the posts which decide that Ch. 4 is wrong about this. However, I also agree in great part with posts which decide TW is wrong about this. The simple minded thing which I see on TSW are from folks who seem to conclude that because one side is definitely wrong the other side is definitely right. The real answer is that both LIN and TW suck and our elected officials should be doing all they can to support alternatives to TW and force companies like LIN who have been given the right to the free use of our airwaves to provide some degree of basic service for free (I think the Bills are actually basic enough to this area that it should be provided for free by any company that CHOOSES to make scads of money from providing the other shows that come along with providing the Bills for free. If LIN does not want to provide basic societal services for free then they are also choosing not to make the massive profits from providing other NBC fare. If TW decides not to provide basic societal services then Buffalo and other municipalities should make exclusive deals with providers who do choose to serve the public interest and should actively support residents availing themselves of other services be it dishes or whatever.

Not only is Tucker wrong about the flat out number which he uses to make the calculation but his figures also seem to assume that Smith is a total fool or does not hire someone who is not a total fool to do his taxes. The 43.8% # which Tucker seems to make assumptions to use does not deduct some of he most elemental tax deductions which folks qualify for that would reduce this tax hit substantially (for example money paid for state taxes can be deducted from the calculation of your federal taxes to substantially lower the tax hit. No reporter can be required to be a tax expert, but if one is not going to use the #s with some bow to reality then one should not use the numbers and expect to be believed. One expects better from a Princeton graduate.

I think one of the big reasons we have not seen Lynch go over 100 yards is that the century mark often comes down to two things: A. We go into the fourth quarter with a lead and the team simply keeps running the ball to move the clock. B. Big breakaway runs which allow an RB to get 25+ yards in a big chunk. I think the fact we had to mount comebacks in 3 of our 4 games has done a lot to force non-use of Lynch at a time when big yards are often piled up as the D is worn down by the pounding of the game. As far as the lack of breakaway runs, Lynch has simply not shown this as part of his fairly wide repartee of specialties. However, given that I do not expect he is going to be able to do every thing, I would gladly keep the ability he has shown to get even small positive yards after he is hit and his ability to catch passes over the breakaway speed threat any day.

I liked the old Bills Big Three better of Jimbo, Thurm and Bruce because they represented both sides of the ball having a D stud that other teams had to game plan around in addition to the two offensive weapons. This also points somewhat the marketing illusion presented by a focus on a Big Three since it is easily arguable about key members of the supporting cast being HOF quality players led by the Big 3A of Tasker on ST and even the argument that Reed deserves in. Again this Big 3 focus leaves out the role that definite NON-HOF player Darryl Talley had as a heart and soul of being a Bill and the Bills D. Even further the shallowness of the Big 3 take ignores the central role which Kent Hull played in the success of this team. In order for this team to become truly great and to become a TEAM, I worry more about who the Big 3As are than I do about who is and the quality of the Big 3.

The thought has crossed my little mind. Stay tuned for something more Jauron oriented now that this is clearly his team.

Very good thread and a refreshing reminder that for many of us we are only legends in our own minds.

The thing I look at are results. I took more of an in depth look at how the 2006 class did in 2007. At the point I examined it just before the season about half of the 1st round choices of the year before were listed as starters for the team that chose them. Of these starters they were heavily weighted toward the first 10 choices in the draft. Generally, the conventional wisdom is that a 1st round choice should be a first year starter but yet just short of half these players were bench warmers after year of play, The conventional wisdom in this case was about as likely to be wrong as right. The other result I look at is who actually wins. If we look at the two cases you chose of Newsome and Polian. It is pretty that he gets a lot of cred for GMing competitive teams that those who point to the draft as THE big element ignore the fact that his eventual SB win was built through pivotal use of UDFA and FA acquisitions, a few key trades and off cap expenditures like getting Dungy. As far as Newsome, any praise of his draft work simply begs for reality to describe that the key to his teams fates clearly were not his draft work which you praise. IMHO the draft is simply overvalued by many as a key to winning when it is important but not the only and in many cases not the primary important step.

The irony of this all is that Marv really led the Bills to making a very good choice at DT in the 06 draft. The irony is that it was 5th rounder Williams instead of reaching up to get McCargo. The draft is a crap shoot so go figure.

For sure! However, this point matters little as you only play the teams the schedulers tell you to play and like it or not (Mort) the Bills are 4 and 0. Is the point that our opponents were dogs relevant at all? Yep, sure it is, but only to the extent of measuring us against our next opponent and how did they amass their record. In terms of our opponents throughout this season, it seems to be a product of an NFL which values parity, but all of our future opponents have clear weaknesses which actually appear larger than any discount one wants to give the Bills for facing schmucks.. The team simply needs to focus on next week in terms of their opponents (with the coaching braintrust keeping a focus on the game at hand as well but with the back of their minds thinking about the big picture in terms of setting up tendencies and pacing their players with the full schedule in mind. We fans on the other hand can do whatever floats our boats and should feel free to fantasize about future outcomes. As I see it, things will change a lot as the season progresses but right now, the pitiful general performance of the Fish, the up and down performance of NYJ as they get used to Favre, and the injury to Brady makes 4-2 extremely doable, 5-1 a real world possibility and the dream of 6-0 a silly fantasy before at least something to aspire to in order to make reality as good as it can be. If we 4 that puts us at 8 wins with 6 other games to think about to find the 2 wins which may well get us into the playoffs, the 3 wins which virtually guarantee it and so on. With Cleveland and SF at home and AZ and KC on the road you would have to be a fool not to like our chances. What the NFL results show us after Miami demolished NE and the Broncs fell to KC is that any given week is the reality of the NFL. While 4-2 in the division is eminently doable even that is no certainty. The only thing real so far is 4-0 and particularly since we play whom they schedule against us this is imply the reality. Like it or not- 1. The first win against Seattle was at home against a team getting worse. However, they were a team that was good two years running and the reality is we blew them away. Even if you want to argue they were schmucks we beat them like you beat up a shmuck so this was a real positive. 2. The Jax win was against a wounded team for sure. However, one of the few predictors of outcome in th NFL is home field advantage and we won on the road against a recent playoff team. Jax is badly damaged but they still pulled off two straight wins pointing to the Bills game being real whether I am a homer or not (I am and proud off it). 3. In many ways the worse Bills performance of the year in that this home game should have been won comfortably. Yet we struggled. Methinks this was the any given Sunday game. The good news is that when you win you get to make lemonade out of lemons, This is one of those games cause we won. The key to winning a fight in this league where parity is king is not whether you are tough enough to knock the opponent down (everybody is) but whether you get back up again. The lemonade from this game is that not only did the Bills crawl back into it after a dreadful start, but even after a sudden long touchdown for the Faders we still came back to clip them. I am not pleased with the way we played but overjoyed with the way we won. 4. Game 4 is also not one for the scrap album except for the highlights, but after a lackluster first half and even a sullen third quarter, we simply blew out an eminently blowoutable team. Its one we should win even if on the road and win going away and we did. The key now is that though if you asked any Bills fan before the season began how he would have felt if we were 4-1 going into the bye he would have said ecstatic. This is still true but the players must simply focus on one game at a time. If they can win on the road against a bad team and enter the bye at 5-0 then they simply need to resist reveling and worry about beating a beatable SD team at home. the first task is to win a winnable game in AZ. We will happily have psychotic dreams of a perfect season for them.

Obviously we will be weaker without our best CB and they will be strong if one of their very good WRs plays. However, the big key to this game is not gonna be whether McKelvin or Youbouty steps up to McGee levels, it is going to be the amount of pressure generated by the pass rush of the Bills on AZ. Fitzgerald, Breaston and perhaps Boldin are quality receivers who can take down most things in their vicinity with only a slight difference in who is covering them as long as the CBs are adequate (which Greer, Youbouty and McKelvin though it is still early in the rookies career). The key is for us to generate pressure on every pass play and get a few sacks as well so Warner has difficulty throwing accurate passes in the vicinity of these receivers. If we get pressure we will get more INTs, if the pressure is muted then it matters less really who the CB is because no one is going to cover these monsters if Warner has the time to throw accurately.

For the reasons cited above, just as Clements is a good and often a very good player he simply is not used to his highest and best value as a CB in a Cover 2 based D. He is a playmaker and in a cover 2 use of the skills that Greer showed in the TD Sunday do happen sometimes but it is the exception rather thn the rule. We do not generally use a CB like Greer, McGee or whomever in a manner that would justify devoting a franchise level cap hit to the player.

And based on how the Bills and the NFL have operated in the past this is exactly what should happen. Some folks on TSW will insist that Nate Clements was woth resigning for large dollars and even those of us who maintain that he was good and often very good would agree that though he was not worth top CB money he was very good. However, the Bills were more than willing to let Nate walk for a larger contract (few saw how silly it would be with him getting the largest contract at the time ever given to a defensive player) simply because the way we use the CB in our version of the Cover 2 the CB plays an important role (as all starters do) but simply not a role that merits paying huge bucks to a player. The cover 2 the way we play it simply does not take maximum advantage of the playmaking abilities of the best CBs in this league as it is a use which emphasizes tackling ability and press coverage in the short zone. It is success at the glitzier duty of covering a WR deep and making INTs which sets the price for the best CBs. Likewise other teams which employ a Cover 2 as their base D such as Indy were unwilling to pay their two relatively average CBs who hit FA at the right moment after Indy won the SB walk for the big bucks they could get rather than pay them. Players also feel the same way about the Cover 2 as players such as Dre Bly was public in his disdain for a Jauron designed Cover 2 which the Lions ran and he got out of Detroit as fast as he could (who could blame him for running from this Millen led monstrosity). At any rate, both the the teams and the players agree that a CB who can get a big contract should leave a Cover 2 based team like the Bills and I agree that Greer is gonzo. The good news for us is that with the drafting of McKelvin (whose ST abilities made him worth a high draft pick), the development of Youbouty and McGee being signed long-term (again an ST add-on that made the extension contract make sense) we appear to be deep enough to let greer walk and we will look for a Will James level replacement when we need a dime to back-up McKelvin, Mcgee and Youbouty.

That and a few leaches and poltices. First do no harm.

The medical treatment for concussion recovery these days is that a player needs to be symptom free for a week before he gets the OK. Thus day-to-dau is the right statement for Boldin at this time as he clearly suffered some neurologic impact but there is uncertainty as to whether he had a concussion. If he wakes up with a headache today, Tuesday or Wed he would be held out. If he awakes with a headache I guess the "manly" thing to do would be not to tell and to tough it out. This would also be the stupid thing to do as we are talking about potential paralysis here and should not be played with simply to entertain us heathens.

The medical treatment for concussion recovery these days is that a player needs to be symptom free for a week before he gets the OK. Thus day-to-dau is the right statement for Boldin at this time as he clearly suffered some neurologic impact but there is uncertainty as to whether he had a concussion. If he wakes up with a headache today, Tuesday or Wed he would be held out. If he awakes with a headache I guess the "manly" thing to do would be not to tell and to tough it out. This would also be the stupid thing to do as we are talking about potential paralysis here and should not be played with simply to entertain us heathens.