Pyrite Gal

Not being privy to the actual discussions between the Bills and F-B an not being in F-Bs headm I think the assumption that he is gone is simply an assumption and really means little in terms of reality. The quotes from him do not look good, but actually are just what I would say in order to secure the largest possible contract from the Bills so the speculation he is a goner may well be correct, but it may well be wrong also. If one is thinking how do you replace him, my sense is that getting Patrick Willis is great because he appears to be a great player, but he does not appear to be a good answer if ones goal is to replace F-B as there are simply real world production and roles that we got and were played by Fletch this year that Willis and quite frankly no rookie can replace. My sense is that if one must replace him because he heads to some other city closer to the seminary where he studies (actually the major reason I think he would walk from what he has said and done) or he gets hit by a car or whatever, what I think the Bills probably should do is: 1. Assuming Crowell really is recovered (such is the report on the healing of his broken foot) I would return him to the MLB position he was originally drafted and trained at as a back-up to Fletch his first two years. 2. I would also hope that the problems TKO has this past year actually came from him working a bit too hard on his recovery and this led to both his tremendous start and his hammy pull his first game. I doubt TKO will return to his Pro Bowl form as he is on the wrong side of 30, but even 80% of the Pro Bowl TKO is pretty good and if he resumes an appropriate semblance of his former play that would do for me. 3. Given we still need a starter an OLB at this point then I use our large cap room on an FA OLB like a Briggs who should be able to command the respect of real NFL play in the past and can fill some of the gaps left by F-Bs departure. In addition, going for an OLB in the draft actually opens up some options for us of players beyond Willis, This to me would seem to be the approach that most helps us win next year.

If the Bills get a wonderful offer for WM which gives us a starting quality RB then the Bills should almost certainly take it. However, trading him for a draft pick (actually probably any first day pick and certainly for a 2nd or 3rd which seems like a fairly unlikely get for him in a trade given that teams were offering about this much for a better producing Shaun Alexander in what appears to have been a deeper draft) not only seems unlikely but to then parley this draft pick into an actual starting RB who has played and produced before seems to be so speculative as to go wat beyond reality. I see no signs that WM is a cancer on this team and if all he is doing is driving fans who care what he does and says, too bad and I simply suggest they suck it up and root for the Bills. WM gas very little leverage to mount a hold out and the Bills are paying him relatively little money that staying the course seems by far to be the correct answer for the Bills right now. The fact he can actually play out his contract and hit FA next off-season plays to the Bills advantage big time as well in that he has a huge financial incentive to produce as well as he can for us in 07 and if he doesn't then let him walk and if he does either tag him or show him the money in a contract that is good for us. In addition, to stating the course in WM management, my suggestion is that we draft an RB this year or acquire an RB with starter potential to replace Shaud Williams to increase competition and give us options. It would be great if we can find such a player on the second day of the draft as I think we have too many other needs (particularly if we lose most of our FAs to waste a first day pick on an RB anyway.

While money is NOT the driving force behind everything, it unfortunately is a significant force in just about everything, particularly in a capitalist economy. It was probably not a coincidence that even in the biblical world which were driven by monarchies rather than capitalism that a figure such as Christ apparently amidst holy words that still inspire people apparently was deeply opposed to the money changers in his society and really spoke out against the acquisitiveness which seem a big part of our society and the NFL culture. In terms of your specific complaint about the elevation of the level of competition which has percolated down to Pop Warner football and the media using these kids games like they were ESPN as a conduit for selling commericial time for loot money does seem to be at the root of whatever evil is being done here. One of the big differences between Baseball, hockey, other major sports and the NFL is that while other pro leagues pay beaucoup bucks for contracts and to run their minor league systems, the NFL has managed to stumble into and create a massive subsidy for the incredibly rich owners as colleges run a massive and unequaled development and training program for the NFL which allows the teams to escape the massive costs of a minor leagues. Certainly there is something in for these colleges as they also (particularly at the BCS level get a big chunk of change for selling tickets and TV rights for their leagues. However, to the extent that so-called student athletes are not allowed to make any profits for their work and the selling of their likenesses and free trade for them selling their services is restrained, this certainly runs counter to a free market approach. Even worse, given that a lof of these football budgets are for state colleges where it is your and my tax dollars which go to save NFL owners from having to pay for a minor league this is a tremendous government subsidy by taxpayers to the incredibly wealthy team owners. Oddly when college players finally succeed (as I think they will in a mostly free market) of getting some cut of this huge income stream in the form of a payment, folks will actually probably mostly or even exclusively fault the players for their greediness and blame pro athletes for setting a bad example imitated by college student-athletes (this phrase is a joke in real life for a large part) for destroying the game they love. Just as in response to the post which began this thread, I think one can correctly call the athlete pot black and be correct. but if one is being honest the real blame is that these athletes are simply getting over in a system which has been in place for years and George Halas and friends ran a general monopoly in running. While I think one can make the judgment one wants about the NFL players it misses a big part of the point to not also acknowledge that the exact same behavior began years ago with the team owners and any fault one chooses to assign to the players legitimately starts with finding the same fault even faster and bigger (up until the recent CBA when the players collective became the majority partner) with the NFL as an entity and the team owners (including Ralph) in particular.

Unfortunately this may be the result of a free market system where capital holders are able to pay the market price they determine a player is worth as long as they live up to the contract they agreed to with an individual player within the confines of the contractual agreement in civil society. The reason the NFL operation actually smacks of a more socialist perspective than an absolute free market perspective is that the NFL and the NFLPA have agreed to restrain trade (for example a person like a Maurice Clarett could not sell his services on the free market to the highest bidder because the NFL and NFLPA agreed to restrain the free market and bar individuals from agreeing to contracts until the class they entered with graduates. This agreement is unlike that in major sports such as baseball or hockey where athletes enter their market place as 16 year olds (the general age of consent where for economic purposes one is an adult) or basketball where things are tigtening but LeBron James skipped college altogether. The irony here is that things are more fair when the free market are subverted to a significant degree. A small market team simply cannot compete in a free market so the question really is how socialist or communist do you want to be to keep the game like you loved it because in essence it can be curtailed but the free maket cannot be stopped. The NFL has simply been better at developing a more socialist framework than the other sports.

I'm not sure whom you are made at or ranting against for screwing up the game because my sense is that the emergence of the the NFL as we know it today and the emergence of the growing partnership between the NFL and NFLPA occured simply because of the inevitable force of the free market. Some may foolishly simply blame the players and its union, but actually the basic turn of events were: 1. The NFL originally developed with guys such as Papa Bear Halas, the Rooneys, and the other team owners gaining essentially a monopoly over the pro football product which allowed them to beat back competing capital resources such as the USFL and prior to that the NFL developers (robber barons) could not best down the AFL, but was smart enough to simply have them join the NFL when it could not beat them. 2. In the 80s the free market battle turned between the union and the league, but with the vehicle of the mid 80s lockout the NFL kicked the snot out of the NFLPA. 3. However, the key to this battle not turning into a situation like the route of the USFL, the players under the leadership of Gene Upshaw who employed some very smart lawyers proposed to simply terminate the NFLPA as a bargaining agent for the players. This would have resulted in a total free market similar that which emerged in Major League Baseball and much like what the NFL did to deal with the AFL, they instead constructed a partnership with the NFLPA which is embodies in long and detailed CBA. I can see why it is not crystal clear who you are ranting against, because the opponent to the old ways which you lament losing is simply the power of capitalism and the free market. If anything, the NFL and NFLPA can be faulted doctrinarily for actually pursuing a fairly socialist method of sharing of the huge football cash cow between the owners and the players. Actually, however, it ironically is the adoption of this socialist framework which restrains free market trading which allows the Bills to exist at all. The CBA does disadvantage smaller market teams, but the alternative of a free market would completely eradicate smaller markets like Buffalo and large markets with a guaranteed revenue stream would be the norm if a free market were truly in place. So I agree with you when you curse the inequities of the CBA it is inequitable to the smaller market teams and really unfair, However, as my father-in-law is fond of pointing out life is not fair. If in fact the NFL operated in a free market framework, smaller markets which have historically been a part of the NFL and owners like Ralph and the Rooneys would likely long ago have been replaced with a bunch of Jerry Jones' and Dan Snyders and virtually every team would be in the Sunbelt or large urban centers like NYC. You are correct to curse the CBA for its inquities, but Buffalo fans should alos praise it because WNY would simply be a speed bump as the team moved to a bigger market if the American sense of free markets really ruled the day.

Obviously a lot of folks think enough about the importance of WM's views that pro or con they have a reaction to what he says, For me its hard to care less about what he says and thus I am not offended by what he says. Since I do care about the Bills performance the fact that he has yet to produce a full 16 game explosive season is a matter that I care about, but the answer as far as that goes is that in managing his contract he has so little leverage that even if were not represented by a jerk whose players usually do not hold out it seems incredibly doubtful he would sit next year. The Bills show all signs to me of being in contractual drivers' seat. WM will have every fiscal incentive to have a big year next year in his FA year. If he doesn't thats a pain but one simply lets him walk. If he does produce at an elite RB level the Bills can either sign him long-term or tag him if they want. As long as WM does not cause any troubles for his fellow players (I see no sign of this) because I give no import whatsoever to WM's ramblings about the Bills overall fiscal status I am not offended by whatever he says about things be it about his baby mommas or whether the Bills stay or go. What I actually find somewhat surprising (though I guess I shouldn't since lots of folks love a good soap opera or derive pleasure from disliking someone) is that a number of folks seem to find such import in WM's ramblings before the media that they choose to be offended or endorse by what he says. As long as what he says has no crucial impact on his teammates I really could not care less what he says. Obviously some do.

Many folks don't like WM at all and are happy to recieve anything to complain about which he does or says. Interpreting what he says in the worst light they can is par for the course. I think regardless of whether someone chooses to interpret this in a way that offends them, I think it is fairly silly to choose to be offended by what any football player thinks about this issue.

The main issue though is not the impacts on the two teams in that game, the issue is about the impact on both teams compared to their opponents in next game. This is one reason why both teams almost certainly must have a bye the next week as they will be facing their next opponent while having recovered as best they can from the 5 hour time zone shift (and the even longer flight time), while the opponent will have had their regular schedule. If the teams that travel to Europe utlize their bye week the next week, they can essentially scrap the week afterwards for much use besides recovery to the extent individuals are thrown off their regular routine and their game by the trip. However, if they were required to play the next weekend, I think the teams that travel to Europe will be at a significant disadvantage against a team which stayed home. Not only will their own diurnal rhythms be thrown off to whatever extent they are by the shift (current teams complain about even the 3 hour shift for an opposite coast US trip. making the trip and winning is certainly doable but it is a real factor which is taken into account and teams prepare for it with activities from adjusting their schedule of activities, to treatments with exposure to boxes with lights, to the Cheeseburger meals the Bills adopted to simply change their mindset), but also, its hard to imagine spouses and family members not taking advantage of this game as an opportunity for them to vacation in Europe and players having to manage the requests for tickets and involvement with the teams travel plans like this was like a player managing his participation in a Bowl game.

Yet, there is a degree to which almost all draftees (even 1st round choices) should be considered projects. It certainly is not one size fits all so I am not saying they all are projects. Though consider, how many NFL draftees really do start and star (the important thing here) right away. Really very few start and star and some of the immediates starters (Williams and Simpson for example) are actually later picks. Thus, there is a degree to which it would not be surprising if the Bills drafted a duy in the first who though he did contribute did not start immediately and quite frankly the Moulds path which saw him fail to even contribute his first couple of years, but he became a star who even made the Pro Bowl a few times is at least a possibility for a player. I do not agree that it is certain at all that Okoye is 3 years away from contributing to a team and even if he was, this does not immediately disqualify him from being a 1st round pick. Of course you hope your first round choice starts and stars immediately, but if he does not it does not necessarily mean you picked a bust or a bad player. Just because you could have done better does not necessarily mean you did a bad thing.

Though the general expectation is that a 1st rounder will start immediately for a team, many teams seem to depart from the frothing at the mouth that many draft gurus have and view almost alll draftees as young men who need to be developed into NFL talents. There is some logic to this in the high pressure big bucks ever more complext world of the NFL, that if one has the ability to bring along a player slowly then you do it. Most folks, (particularly the ESPN inspired pundits) take this view and thus they were shocked when TD took WM figuring that the Bills had no need at RB with Henry in place. However, the team realized that it was actually the fact that they had Henry which allowed them to take the risk (the important part of part of the info the Bills had which outsiders did not was that the Bills docs upon reviewing WM's medical info judged his multiple injuries to be clean tears he could recover from if he showed the commitment to rehab he did putting on a dog and pony show prior to the draft) and draft an RB who could sit for a year. Henry did not make the pick senseless, in fact it was his presence that made the pick make any sense for the Bills. Th other factor which none of us outsiders (and in fact none of the rest of the NFL knew was how nuts Henry was and his fiscal idiocy which bought the Bills an extra year of ownership for chump change was a clear indicator that Henry was headed for problems. This actually proved true when Henry rather quickly was suspended for substance abuse, but fortunately he seems to have righted the ship of play and had a far better year than WM (though WM has certainly outperformed him over the years thet both have been in the NFL. As I think about this, I generally have been of the mind that the Bills sitting on the recent draft pick McCargo at DT and the FA acquisition Triplett along with the surprising nice development of Williams makes DT an area the Bills need to improve, but likely would want to do this by hoping that the preliminary better signs McCargo may well have shown just prior to his injury will allow them to get away with merely a cheap vet DT acquisition or increased DT reliance on Hargrove as a swingman. However, it may simply be the case that the prescence of all this potential (though pretty unrealized given our problems against the run) at DT actually liberates the Bills to draft Okoye and bring him along slowly in the rotation and create a lot of competition at DT. Certainly at position like RB the trend is to not fear but in fact to seek out two players capable of starting and to draft a Mulroney even though you have Dillon and to use this to great benefit. Perhaps a D minded guy like Jauron particularly since they are committed to using waves of DTs might use the same logic to draft a youngster like Okoye and fill up on DTs.

The odd news is while this is certainly bad news for any fans who cares about the personality of their players, the key is that the combination of his clearly not being among the elite rushers in the league and his being a loudmouth simply eliminates any real leverage that he has to hold out. The fact that none of the RBs you correctly (for the most part most people would likely agree) name as better than him is on the Bills roster means that the best management strategy for the Bills is almost certainly to stay the course and allow WM to play out his contract and head into FA next year. This should produce a situation where he gets the noodge of wanting to perform well next year to cash in as an FA. If folks are right that he is unmotivated but really wants a big payday, next year should be a good one for him. The Bills are in the drivers's seat contractually since if he really does produce like an elite RB next year, the Bills are getting his 07 production incredibly cheaply could simply choose to tag him if they wish and pay him the elite money of a top 5 average salary. If folks are so driven wild by his financial musings then the Bills would still retain the ability to move him for value, but those of us who care as little about his ramblings regarding whether the Bills should move as we do about his neanderthal attitude toward his baby mommas's I would happily take a phenomenal year on the field from WM next year and let the ownership chips fall where they may in terms of who owns (and pays a mint) for a WM motivated by his contract year to have a good year. In essence, exactly the reasons you state are why WM is certainly likely to be a Bill next year.

If we take Willis as our MLB starter it seems to me a lot of other things have to happen in order for this team not to take likely take a fairly significant step back in D production as overall we would need to replace a bunch of roles F-B fills for us that it seems pretty doubtful that Willis could fill. I have few doubts that the descriptions of Willis as a player is almost certainly going to be a better player than Fletch who can do a credible job at the tackle machine role F-B played for us and with a significant height advantage and the background to play good coverage he should replace him quite well in one on one coverage. However, in addition to outpacing Fletcher in these areas he will also have to replace: 1. F-B is the D captain and a positive locker room force for this team and I doubt any rookie will have the respect to fill this critical role for a while, so those who advocate a Willis replacement of F-B at MLB (it makes more sense to me if we lose him as we appear likely to do that we go to FA for a replacement) should at least talk about how they see his leadership being replaced on this team. Before folks simply choose to disregard the import of the locker room leadership, my sense is that the default on a team is that when the braintrust suspends a player as the Bills did with Moulds last is for players to band with the player when the bosses crack down. Even in cases where the punishment is well-deserved (as it seems to be in this case where Moulds threw his hissy fit midgame because a younger player - Evans - had unseated him as the go- to guy (even the TO case split the Philly team when he was suspended bit ot seems locker room leaders like F-B and none other NFLPA Pres Troy Vincent judged the discipline was merited and even with TKO initially publically questioning Bills action and the Bill's braintrust being led by the increasingly unpopular TD and MM the team hunh together and Moulds left town. I would be shocked if the publicly acknowledged locker room leaders did not play a role in keeping the team unified and with F-B and TV gone positive leadership from the players will need to emerge on this team. A quality FA vet pick-up can play this role a rookie should not be expected to and cannot. Its no downcheck on Willis, but if he is our choice at MLN this role will need to be filled from elsewhere in order for this team to likely be a winner. Youth is great but the downside that comes with that is relative inexperience and a Bills team with the youth movement underway appears to probably need to deal with that. 2. I have few doubts about this Butkus winner being a good one on one coverage guy, but what he is expected to do by choosing him as a starter as a rookie is to actually play a central role in making the Tampa 2 we play work and I do no think it is likely that a rookie will be able to handle this role at MLB. In the Tampa 2 (as traditionally run) and it seems in the Tampa 2 as employed by the Bills, the MLB not only has the typical run stuffing duty and coverage of any receiver that may stray through the middle zone on some 3rd downs, the MLB is required to divide the field into three with the two safeties and play deep zone. It is the rare rookie (in fact none of them really who has both seen a bunch of NFL plays to diagnose whether the play is a deep pass and he should cover a fleet WR or he should pinch in if the opponents use trickery on 3rd down. If the Bills draft Willis to start it would not be surprising if he really was a two down back early in his career and likely the Bills would need to do something to supplement him and his inexperience. 3. F-B also calls the plays for the D, In theory, one of the safeties is in a position of seeing the field and near the center of the field where he can effectively communicate to both sides could play this role. However, since both Whitner and Simpson have only a season under their belts, this Bills might have to go to some sort of pass along communications strategy to make it work with a rookie starter at MLB. There are other things F-B accomplished last year which will be quite difficult for Willis to replicate (he led LBs in the entire league in terms of INTs not to mention us needing to replace his team leading INT totals. If we draft Willis to start we would get a great player, yet one who unless we find a way to do the things F-B did that a rookie cannotm then likely this D will take a step back in performance next year.

The following summary from above of McShay's mock describes exactly why I think Okoye may well be our pick in the crapshoot known as the NFL draft. Here, by request, is Espn's McShay's mock Draft: Much will change in the coming months, as underclassmen officially declare and players take part in postseason all-star games, individual workouts and the scouting combine, but here is our initial first-round mock for the 2007 NFL draft: x -- Still to be determined by coin flip y -- Still to be determined by playoffs + -- Underclassman 1. Oakland Raiders (2-14) Projected pick: +JaMarcus Russell, QB, LSU Russell vs. Brady Quinn? Let the great debate begin. Most teams have Quinn ahead of Russell, but Raiders owner Al Davis could fall in love with Russell's size and deep arm. 2. Detroit (3-13) Projected pick: Brady Quinn, QB, Notre Dame The Lions will be stoked if Quinn falls to them at No. 2. Wouldn't it be great, though, if Matt Millen takes another wide receiver (Calvin Johnson) with this pick? 3t. x-Cleveland (4-12) Projected pick: +Alan Branch, DT, Michigan The Browns want Russell with this pick, but they'll settle for a 330-pound playmaker to help solidify Romeo Crennel's three-man defensive front. 3t. x-Tampa Bay (4-12) Projected pick: +Calvin Johnson, WR, Georgia Tech The Bucs have other more pressing needs, but coach Jon Gruden can't pass on the draft's most dynamic offensive weapon. 5. Arizona (5-11) Projected pick: Joe Thomas, OT, Wisconsin As usual, the Cardinals are a prime candidate to trade down. They should get lots of bidders if Thomas -- the only elite offensive lineman in this class -- is still available. 6. Washington (5-11) Projected pick: Gaines Adams, DE, Clemson Adams is a no-brainer for a Redskins defense that set a team record for the fewest sacks in a season (19) in 2006. 7. Minnesota (6-10) Projected pick: +Jamaal Anderson, DE, Arkansas It's hard to believe the Vikings still need defensive end help, but Erasmus James suffered a season-ending injury in the opener and Kenechi Udeze failed to notch a sack. Anderson is the complete package physically and he should capitalize on 13.5 sacks as a junior in 2006. 8. Houston (6-10) Projected pick: +Adrian Peterson, RB, Oklahoma Peterson is expected to make his decision to bolt for the NFL in the next few days. Drafting Peterson here would help to overshadow the Texans' colossal mistake of passing on Reggie Bush with the top overall pick last year. 9. Miami (6-10) Projected pick: Leon Hall, CB, Michigan The Dolphins could consider QB Brian Brohm with this pick, but they also could go the free-agency route in order to get short-term relief. Hall would be a good value here and would help upgrade a patchwork secondary. 10. Atlanta (7-9) Projected pick: LaRon Landry, S, LSU Landry is a ball-hawk free safety who would instantly upgrade the athleticism of the Falcons secondary. 11. San Francisco (7-9) Projected pick: +Glenn Dorsey, DT, LSU Dorsey might not fall this far, but the 49ers certainly wouldn't protest such a scenario. Dorsey is a disruptive force as a one-gap penetrating interior lineman. 12. Buffalo (7-9) Amobi Okoye, DT, Louisville Projected pick: The Bills have more pressing needs, including cornerback and middle linebacker. However, Okoye is a fast-rising 19-year-old with great potential. I think that we do have additional pressing needs which all things being equal might have us looking elsewhere, and given the D focus last draft it would be the Os turn, but Marv seems to be a best player available kind of guy and given tha Okoye is not only described in a way that deescribes the archetype Cover 2 DT but his youth may well make him pretty moldable and give him a leg up as a BPA. His interview may make all the difference if he fits our mold for character guys.

But the problem is a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick stands a substantial chance of being worth very little. I think that we armchair GMs place far too much value in the speculative draft than reality does. Folks seem to operate on the assumption that the draft pick one trades for has the production of Laurence Mulroney when really he could just as easily have the production of Eric Flowers, Ryan Leaf (all three of whom were actually thought of as being a better value than this 2nd or 3rd) or actually the production of John McCargo or Ashton Youbouty (if you want to look at the even more real world of whom this Bills crew evaluated as being a worthwhile 2nd and 3 rd pick by this team. The key to selecting a draft pick acquired for WM is actually the very same thing as was the key for th Bills led by TD choosing WM which was that we had Travis Henry on the roster already and we could comfortably deal with our choice with the #18 be of zero value to us that year. The key to me for Marv and the Bills is the question of what they have at RB in 2007 and it is simply an unacceptable risk for the prospects of this team to go into this season with our assets being little more than A-Train and a draft pick (be it 3rd or even 2nd round). Even if WM is a total sexual and financial idiot (which he appears to be) and even if he only presents a threat that he might pull off a NYJ performance on his way to 990 yards for the season, having WM on the roster (even if the future holds a potential holdout) is of far higher value than the speculative nature of a draft choice.

If someone offers you a no-brainer value for a trade for WM than by all means take it. However. a 2nd rounder is not enough value for the Bills to make a serious playoff run in 07 as I am not confident in A-Train as a starter and the draft is such a crap shoot (look at what we got from our second and third choices last year in what proved to be a very good draft by Marv and the crew if one is trying to gauge the potential value of a 2nd rounder, Though many fans hate having WM as an RB on their team because of his bizarre comments regarding women and business in Toronto, I am more driven by what is produced on the field and even if WM is no where near the elite RB folks hoped he was (and some folks seemed to really expect or hope he would be which to me ignores the probabilities caused by his injury), I feel much better about a roughly 1000 yard a year RB who we actually pay very little for with A-Train as a solid #2. As WM has no real leverage to mount a hold out, I think we stay the course and let him walk if his next year production is not inspired by him heading into FA and alternately if between this motivation and Fairchild calling better plays that utilize the RB as a receiving threat we can still tag him or actually pay him if he somehow actually performs like a top 5 RB. Stay the course.

Whether the Bills should trade McGahee largely depends on whether they're planning on offering him an extension. If they've pretty much made up their minds that he's not going to get an extension when his contract expires, Marv should start considering all reasonable offers that teams make for McGahee. What I don't want to see happen is for the Bills to lose out on the 2nd or 3rd round pick we could have had for McGahee just because we wanted to get one last year of play out of him. One year of McGahee's play is not worth that kind of price. Actually, I think the deciding factor here is not whether the Bills want to extend WM or not (he like other football players from a business perspective is just a commodity and one makes decisions about how to handle a commodity based not initially on what he is interested in but instead on how this commodity can best help the team achieve its goals. Football is fortunately more than a business (unless of vourse you are talking about NCAA Div. 1 football which seems to be all about being a business these BCS days) and as people are involved they have other motivations (sometimes fairly negative) there is more to the actual operations than business decisions. However, business is the starting framework and its probably most useful since we fans are not really in control of the day to day to think about what is the best business decision. As far as business goes there is a partnership between the NFLPA and NFL embodied in the CBA, In this balance the individual who is good enough to be a player gets the ample cash reward of a huge paycheck for playing a boys game, For this big win, the players have constrained their right to bargain as individuals on the free market by giving up certain ownership rights for 4 or more years (they give up the ability to go to the free market for various numbers of years in exchange for cash) and also they give the team owners the ability to tag them and constrain them from the market for up to two years. Basically, the cards are mostly in the Bills hands as WM cannot take advantage of the free market for a year and potentially as many as 3 years if the Bills chose not to let him. The Bills can give him money to extend this right to meet their interest but have little reason to do this since WM has not produced like an elite back. It seems pretty clear to me that the deal is here that the Bills need do little more than stay the course and either agree to a deal with WM if he actually produces or let him walk if he does not. All this debate over what he said, baby mommas. etc. is pretty ignorable junk for the most part,

It was semi-amusing to read this thread and then go to TBD to look at the WGR comments as this all seems to be the usual much ado about nothing. IMHO this is a better team with WM and A-Train than it is with A-Train and a draft choice at RB next year. Further, the Bills have too many critical needs to fill (particularly if all the potential FA departures must be replaced) than to have to allocate any draft resources beyond a second day RB pick for development and certainly big FA money for new 16 game starter at RB (in fact if I have any problems with WM's play since we have him for such a cheap cap hit its that he unlike his first two years injury did not allow him to give us 16 games) is more than we wanna pay as we have other needs. IMHO, the right answer is stay the course with WM. Let him play next year as a pre-FA year and see if this incentive gets even more out of him. If he has another year with output like this year let him walk unless he agress to a cheap deal. If he actually has a top 5 RB total and Fairchild actually used what seems to be his potential as a receiver then either show him the money or tag him. Anyone who sleeps with WM deserves what they get. Anyone who does to Mr. Mensa for financial perspectives also deserves what they get, If he performs well on the field (which I hope he does as a Bills fan) I'm happy to root for this mental midget when he plays and ignore him when he talks. I did this with Jim Kelly and I can certainly do it with McGahee,

I guess that I assumed from the deep import that folks seem to giving it in terms of assessing how well he plays that they were not actually reffering him simply being too light or even getting consistently knocked back for an extra gain of yardage before he makes the tackle because if that is what folks are refering too, its actually a not abnormal and relatively minor point in terms of assessing a players play. From my watching the game, it is actually a relatively rare thing for a defender to hit a runner and consistently or even usually drive the runner back. RBs run as their profession. Usually they are the ones initiating the contact and the defender is doing a good job when he merely stops the forward progress of the offensive player. Certainly one sees cases in every game and with virtually every runner that they do get knocked backward by a defensive hit, but this is not the rule and most defenders are knocked back and the runner falls forward even when he brings them down. Certainly, I would judge that F-B also does not usually stone runners for no gain after contact, but I do not see from my watching the game that he routinely gets overwhelmed on every hit and certainly is not dragging as he is hauled for extra yardS by runners routinely. In fact, this is clearly not what people are maintaining when they complain about Fletcher, they are saying not that he is a weak tackler who is dragged along, but they are complaining that he makes his initial hits downfield. Again if he was little more than a road bump for the runner, one would expect that he would get no credit at all for tackles if he is so light in the pants as you say he is vrushed aside, or at least if he is so light in his hits that he needs help bringing down runners then it is more than reasonable that one would see this at least somwhat reflected in him having a disproportionate number of assist vis a vis solo tackles. My post are overly verbose and I am the second to admit it, but just because a response is different in that it is shorter does not also mean it is different because it is correct. It may require too many words for you to substantiate your claims, however, it does not seem unreasonable to ask for even some hint of objective evidence that would INDICATE that the view he is a "light" tackler is correct. An indication of this for example would be a disproportionate number of assists rather than solo tackles by him, OR him not getting many tackles. On the contrary, he consistently and easily has led the Bills in tackles credited to him and while this stat is not conclusive it certainly is a better indicator than the typical fact free opinion. In addition, he is far more often credited with solo tackles rather than assists. Perhaps one might be able to do a statistical analysis to show that his 2:1 solo/assist ration is low for an MLB. I do not kow and think this analysis might take more time than I am willing to spend on this since the indicators on the face of them are in F-Bs favor. This is an area of research I would hope someone would take the time to do this who offers their contention without any objective support at all. The numbers I see all indicate he is a pretty good player. However, far be it from me to insist anyone take the time to do something I would not do and if folks are happy to conclude he is a stiff based on their fact free views then so be it.

Willis is certainly a good prospect as he won the Butkus award as the nation's top LB player. However, the fact he that the nation's top LB is likely to be available when we draft at #12 (and it appears many have him lower than that but any final decisions or rankings prior to the Combine particular given the Bills emphasis on character and the all important Combine interview when the Bills get to look him in the eye all rankings are not fully informed and are way premature) speaks volumes that like any human being there are some limitations here. Even if we got him and he turns out to be the athletic stud we all want, while he it is to be hoped would have the physical capabilities to make plays I doubt (and I think anyone who understands the game would also doubt) that even a talented rookie will be able to do everything that F-B did for the Bills this year. Specifically: 1. F-B by all signs is a team leader and a good locker room guy. Rookies are correctly busy learning how to become NFL players and having what probably their first legal consistent paying job since they were paperboys. My sense is that F-B really did do some important things for the Bills as I suspect for example no Bills stupidly came to Eric Moulds defense when the team suspended him last year for throwing a hissy fit in a game. My sense is that given that even the Eagles were divided over the team disciplining idiot Terrell Owens for his outlandish acts, the fact the Bills were pretty united on this (given there were lots of good reasons for opposing MM and TD even if Moulds was an idiot was a tribute to good locker room leadership from guys like Fletcher and Vincent. There is simply no way Willis can or should be asked to fill this role and the question for the Bills braintrust is if F-B goes then who steps up to be a locker room leader in his stead? 2. In addition, to the gap created in locker room leadership, the loss of F-B creates a gap in on field leadership which again no rookie can fill and the question for Bills partisans is then who on the D fills this role. One of the neat things for this fan to watch in terms of Flether-Baker was in the disputes with the refs which happen in almost every game, it was clearly F-B who seemed to be the guy in the refs face pleading the Bills case before he got shooed away and often F-B seemed to go to the correct ref (different refs have different responsibilities thought the umpire makes the ultimate call or communicates it to the stadium) and it was fascinating for one paying too much attention to football to watch F-B at work. One wonders who will fill the role as D captain. 3. F-B simply had more INTs than any other LB in the NFL and led the team in INTs when turnovers are the lead statisitical factor in determing who wins and who does not each week. I expect Willis to start for the Bills immediately if drafted #12, but I am not foolish enough to expect the will lead LBs or the team in INTs thus almost certainly if he takes F-B's spot we are going to see a reduction in performance in this area. 4. One of the reasons why F-B got so many INTs (and scored 2 D TDs) is that he has taken so many snaps and seen so much he has great experience as a pro. Again we are going to see a drop off whrn/if F-B goes elsewhere in this regard. I hope/expect a rookie MLB starter like a Butkus winner to be more physically talented than F-B but I am not under the illusion that there would not be some horrible to watch bad moments for Willis or any rookie in 2007 as they learn the game. 5. I do not expect a rookie to do the playcalling F-B did and given we have took first year safeties which is generally the position which allows a player to see the whole field and yell out the calls, whenn/if F-B goes a problem is going to be created that no rookie will fill and I wonder what we will do if the plan is to draft an MLB. Actually drafting a top notch OLB and having Crowell move to MLB makes more sense and I know Willis was a great ILB but I do not know enough about him to know if this translates to him playing OLB while he learns the game. 6. We will need to replace a unique skill set which F-B brings to the table as someone who clearly is not only fast enough to play the safety role of the MLB in the Tampa 2 but has shown extremely good ball handling skill over the years with his kickoff return job and with INT totals. Willis may be a great player to get, however, there seems to be no way that his greater physical skills than F-B would not mean we still have a lot to replace when/if F-B goes. The basic lesson here was that if we suspected we were not going to resign F-B we should have made an investment in his replacement last year.

The simple questions are who do you replace him with and what do you lose and what does that player bring in his skills that replace and surpass F-B?

This mantra from folks siting Fletcher for getting too many tackles 3 (and even some claim 5) yards downfield is a common one among those who say let F-B walk. Even if this were a true problem (which I actually don't think it is, but lets assume it is for this discussion) there are a number of different reasons why this could occur and I'm not sure that letting Fletcher walks solves a lot of these issues. 1. He does not fill his gap responsibility because he is not a good tackler. The theory fits as a reason why an MLB is not good enough to stop the run. However, this reasoning does not fit with the numbers. A lack of tackles to his credit from this Bill who actually holds the record for most tackles credited to a Bill and leads the team in tackles every year does not seem to fit the theory that he gets run over in the gap all the time. 2. He does get into the gap such that he does make contact, but he is a weak tackler who gets carried for gains. Again this theory is a reasonable explanation why an MLB would not be good against the run, but the numbers do not indicate this is what is happening. If he was merely a speed bump who slowed runners down but could not stop them without help, then one would expect that F-B's tackles would actually be for a disproportionate number of assists as he hangs on to the RBs shoelaces while another defender joins in to bring him down. On he contrary, F-B's Bill leading tackles to his credit run a nout 2 solo tackles for every assist. In addition, if the problem was that he was a weak tackler, one thinks we would see specific complaints and several examples could be specifically sited of RBs dragging F-B along or breaking from his grasp for big gains. 3. He plays too far back and hits runners after they get upfield. If this were the case it sounds more like a problem with how the coaches are positioning him rather than his play persee. If F-B could stand to hit RBs sooner then the coaches should play him nearer the LOS in the gaos he is responsible for. 4. The problem is regardless of where the coaches play him he recognizes the play to slowly to cover the proper gap. This theory neither fits the general talk about Fletcher in terms of how folks view his experience or what we have seen him do. Specifically, F-B calls the D signals because he is considered someone who knows and understands the game. We saw a good example in the last game against the Ravens of how he seems to understand what is going on in plays in an almost uncanny. His INY came on a play where he was covering an RB and he picked off the McNair pass as though McNair was throwing to Fletcher rather than the RB. Fletcher went right to the spot where McNair was doing a quick release to rather than simply covering the man in his zone. F-B's job in the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2 we play is that he splits the field in 3 with the two safeties, having the ability to diagnose the play is what alot of this about. 5. He is on the wrong side of 30. Definitely true, but this old in the tooth LB not only led the entire Bills team in INTs (more than NC or McGee or the safeties) but in fact he led the NFL in INTs by an LB. All in all, its not simply important that folks think him getting credited with tackles too far downfield is a problem, but WHY do folks think this is happening and what is F-Bs shortcoming that leads to this? If anything, to me this would really be an indictment of our DL or of our scheme if it were true. Quite frankly he should be getting more assists or less tackles overall because folks are being at least slowed up or in fact simply stoned by Triplett and Williams (or whomever is in at DT as Fletch closes in to help them bring the RB down or to stand over his already tackled carcass. if anything, it seems like the RBs are finding holes in the line so they get into the second tier untouched and then F-Bs hits them and brings them down. Stats tell one little conclusively but they do tend to indicate what the reality is and the stats and my observations of the games do not reveal a big problem with how Fletcher plays the game. The real story here to me is that if in fact he walks, I'm not sure the Bills have any alternatives but to buy the best LB they can find as I doubt many or any drafted rookies are going to step in and play the Tampa 2 MLB spot well diagnosing whether it is a run they need to pinch in for or a pass and they better drop back and cover like a safety. Its possible a talented FA might be able to produce field production which equals Fletcher, but he also would need to replace him being the D captain, a respected leader in the locker room and though F-B is certainly shorter than the norm he is a ball hawk and has such superb ball handling skills he not only led the team in INTs (another indicator the coaches use him as much in pass coverage as in run stopping) but eben has worked as a short kickoff return guy instead of the usual RB or DB where the team sacrifices bulk for ball skills. F-B is not a perfect player in any regard, however, I think the roles he fulfills for the Bills will be difficult to replace if he leaves.

Thanks for the in-depth thoughtful analysis, while there are those without the attention span to read anything longer than a comic strip, the effort is greatly appreciated and read by some. The great thing about TSW is that everyone is free to chose how they spend their time and can read if they want and choose to comment if they want. If folks see this as a waste of time its their right and that's great (the only thing that is weird is those who complain a post is a waste of time and then choose to waste more of their ohh so valuable time posting to say a post is a waste of time) At any rate, my sense is: 1. I aggree with your overall assessment that drawing solid conclusions about the Bills strategy (much less specifics about whom they will pick, go after in the FA, or even resign from our own FAs) is very difficult to do until we see how the Combine, draft entry, and a month of hype (to assess as best we can what our opponents are going to do) happens. The best bet at this point is really careful review and assessment of our own players and needs. 2. DE- Agreed generally. I must admit that Hargrove appears to be a fan favorite because he is so excited and demonstrative. However, though I think this aspect might make him a great Buffalo Jill, I'm not horribly impressed with his play and would not be shocked or disappointed if he were beaten out in competition next pre-season. 3. DT- Given the huge amount the Bills got gashed by runners last year and given that Jauron is a defensive guy by experience going back to his training days it seems quite likely that the Bills will do something here. The irony in all this is the actually the seeming prototype of the penetrating DT who actually has a wide body so he can command the middle if run at is actually probably Sam Adams. However, in the end and definitely without buddy Phat Pat here to keep him thinking about what his teammates were doing he appeared to be fairly uncoachable in terms of getting him to play any other way than what he chose to do. Obviously the braintrust saw a lot in McCargo and those who seem to want to write him off after 1 year are not only premature in that it takes a good three years of play to do a real assessment for most players but even more so his 1st rounder contract and the amount we spent on him will get him every chance to be used at critical times as a DT whether he deserves it or not. Anderson getting a visit from the Turk is a situation which creates a hole which they can fill with a pick-up, but my sense is that betweeb Jauron having faith in his ability to make his scheme work with most reasonable players and with McCargo coiming back I would not be surprised if the braintrust relies on these two conditions to fix our clear shortcomings at DT. 4. OLB- What happens with TKO will make a huge difference in whether this is an area or need or we for the most part stand pat. My sense is that TKO shows the signs as best as I can tell of a man who worked incredibly hard and diligently to make a comeback and this was shown in his very first play from scrimmage where he got a sack. However, judging from the fact he seemed to be working so hard and clearly was a driven man I think unfortunately he worked a little too hard and rushed himself back. I think this was shown in: A. The nagging injuries he suddenly became regularly afflicted with which were not something that happened to him pre-injury. B. Him getting hit with a hammy strain soon after he took the field. C. The coaches not having the gutsiness to slow him down but they shifted him to the SLN slot to minimize some of the running he had to do. I hope and actually expect that he will be a little less frantic and driven in working out this off-season and he will simply use the time to rest and heal a bit. Ellison I like also but see him as a good back-up and average starter at best so I hope TKO comes back. 5. MLB- Agreed. I like him a lot and think he has been productive as a Bill and really has played multiple critical roles for us. It is unclear to me however, whether our generally losing record with him as a player leader speaks to him being a productive player who simply falls short of being a great player because he has not simply willed his teammates to do better than they normally would do and thus win, though I think it is more likely that between TDs dysfunctionality which led to boner like his hiring of GW (a great DC but nor a good HC as I think TD was attracted to him because he knew he could beat him if GW tried to pull a Cowher on him) and his teammates not being good enough that Fletcher did the best he could though in the end it was inadequate. Despite his inadequacies in overall results though, the main reason I also wish the Bills had shown him the money and locked up an extension for him already is that we do not have a replacement for him on this team (DiGregorio? please). Talent wise I think our best bet would actually be to have Crowell shift back to the MLB position he originally trained for until his very good back-up play made him the obvious replacement for Posey and then TKO when his achilles forced him to flip sides. Still this leaves us with a definite need to draft an LB or spend heavily on one in free agency but I would not be surprised if this get is an OLB and Crowell moves inside. Folks ragging on F-B's play seems ill-informed to me. He has the football sense and the sideline to sideling speed which makes him the perfect MLB for the Tampa 2 and even the complaint of some that he makes too many tackles downfield seems to me more of an indictment of our DTs than of Fletch or of the coaches because he is not used properly to get to the tackle at the LOS, If the problem was actually F-Bs inability to fill the gaps properly then rather than racking up so many tackles, the outcome would actually be that he would be bulled over and miss tackles or at least would not have a 2:1 ratio of solo to assisted tackles. if he got bulled over at the point of attack. he RN would either escape his grasp or F-B would get assisted tackles rather than solo tackles. I hope they resign him (though even if they do I think some additional leadership from the players will be necessary to put this team over the top mostly because if he is gone I do not see the many skills he brings easily replaced by anyone on the roster, by most FAs (for example Porter at LB can produce the numbers but I don't think has the character or knowledge of the game), or by a rookie. CB- I agree this is another area where if we do not sign our primary guy going FA then we have some issues. The good news is while I see no real MLB options (if Crowell moves over we need to spend big bucks to replace him at OLB) on the roster, I agree with you that we at least have the potential to solve this problem if Youbouty develops like he should. S- Agreed Overall a good job and thanks

Exactly. In fact he not only did not fizzle in his second year as our KR guy but actually led the entire NFL in kickoff return average but did not repeat his Pro Bowl berth as the spot went to a player who actually got a few TDs so the casual observer did not take into account his steady return work. Even in this past season though McGee's return average was "only" 3rd we saw a couple of teams more willing to take the penalty for kicking the ball OB and give the Bills a very good drive start and risk giving JP that advantage than risk their return team stopping McGee.

The point of my post was not that franschise players cannot be found at #12 (or even in the 7th round if one sites a Terrell Davis or UDFA if one believes in Jason Peters). The point was that there is no likely CERTAIN franchise player at #12. If the Bills (you or anyone else) can name the next Shawn Merriman or Vilma who you want at #12 then do not trade down pick the guy. If you can identify the next Joe Montana pick him in round 2 so no one snatches him before your round 3 choice or if you can identify the next Tom Brady, then pick him in round 5 so no one snatches him before your pick in round 6. However, given the quality the Bills showed in making late picks last year, the strength in number approach looks like a good option for this team.

As far as WM is concerned, draft an RB propsect you believe in (preferably on the second day as we have bigger immediate needs than RB that a first day pick MIGHT be helpful with) an stay the course as far as his contract. He has little leverage if he were to mount a holdout (as actually the track record despite the blusterous talk for the rubes is that Rosenhaus' folks do not tend to mount holdouts) this year. Let him play with the incentive of playing out his contract and if he has a top 5 RB year then simply tag him or show him the money. There is little value for this team in trading WM now and ample leverage for the team regardless of how well he plays next year. Folks concerned with the soap opera aspects of this entertainers life will not be pleased, but folks focused on how he does on the field will be fine.