Pyrite Gal

I would actually agree with your general thought but amend to say that yes structure is generally good but the key point is not to adopt structure for structures sake. Only good structure is good and bad structure mat be nice theoretically but bad structure is simply bad. My suggestion is that you as the moderator on the board pushing this need to be disciplined enough not to simply hold to a particular structure because it is the way we decided to do things and particularly not because of pride of authorship in that it is yours or someone else;s suggestion, While one of the the great things about TSW is that you and the other moderators have been appropriately draconian as a private sector enterprise can be about simply eliminating posts and other efforts you judge have the potential to take us down the failed path of the Rochester D&C Board where their commitment to free speech simply lerd to extreme elements irresponsibly killing the Board, you and the moderators will need to be diligent about being very loose in forcing the structure on folks and defending it. I see a real difference between stupid effort to spam TSW for instance which should be draconianly dealt with to protect the board and the idea of enforcing a structure for the conversation which I do not think will merit the same diligence. I think offering up separate pinned fora for discussions of topics like The Draft, The Failure to Sellout the final home dates and the potenitial for the Bills to Move, Free Agency, and whatever else might be a helpful tool that may structure the conversation and provide some guidance to posters. However, an idea like choosing a topic for a particular week which governs the board will be essentially subverted when something newsworthy in an off-topic area happens and an attempt to keep people on the topic of the week and avoid the news will essentially be arbitrary and doomed to failure as it simply bucks reality. Rather than call upon the moderators to exercise judgment about content (different topics will essentially float different people's boats) if you simply provide pinned topic areas you will find some sense of free choice as people will go where they want to go, but still have some structure within the pinned topic. Essentially this mimics the already successful TSW model where the board has a variety of areas such as the politics area, the Stadium Wall, etc. Essentially this simply divides the TSW topic area into a set up sub-topics. You might even post statistical information for each sub-topic such as the # of posts received that day. My guess is that you will find that users essentially vote with their fingers by posting most on the topics of interest and not going top other areas. The worse case would be if you or a moderator chose an a topic that interested them for the whole board (whither Willis for example) but others are either not interested or simply sick of it and they get in the habit of avoiding TSW a lot.

My sense is that the bottomline on WM is this: He has shown and demonstrated that he can be an outstanding rusher at times and he brings some talents and abilities to the game which are impressive. However, he has simply not realized that outstanding potential all the time nor in all facets of the game. Further, there are certainly a number of legitimate explanations for why he has not realized this potential all the time (such as the devastating injury at the end of his college career he worked back from, such as being part of a troubled Bills team without productive O leadership at QB, having a poor OL, and/or limited attempts to even see if he has consistent pass catching skills from Fairchild. However, the proof is in the pudding and many fans have simply at least grown tired of or given up on him ever being the consistent very good (many ask for or even require greatness) producer at RB for the Bills. This perspective has been intensified by a presentation of himself which strikes some fans as cavalier and he has made comments like his "Baby Momma" effort with Stephen Smith which has driven some Bills fans to want him gone yesterday. Personally, I really couldn't care less if he is an idiot as long as he is productive on the field. However, he does not seem to have the personal make-up to be a team and community leader in terms of his presentation and absent consistent very good (forget great) on field production the absence of real leadership on this offense in terms of a personality or method for successful operation his lack of leadership skills for the community and potentially the team becomes glaringly obvious and an annoyance. My sense is that each person is his own person and as long as he is not a cancer on the team I have no requirement that he be a team leader. However, in the absence of very good personal production and a winning record for the team, the whining from some fans his personality has allowed to fester makes rooting for this team a lot less enjoyable for this fan. I think that particularly since he is under contract for another season, and his inconsistent performances despite his occaisonal showings of great potential puts the Bills in a position to simply play this out and show WM the money if he shows he can be a very good performer as next season rolls on and not give him a big contract if he continues to underperform. However, there is likely to be so much whining about him from some fans on outlets like TSW, I am beginning to hope the Bills somehow move him for value just to shut some people up (though even if he is gone there will still be an ongoing dribble of fan complaints as there were about Bledsoe even after he was not our problem anymore. I think with some good tough consistent leadership from the ownership and GM, this whole thing can be played out to the Bills benefit. However, I do not know if doing this is going to be worth the price of the various extreme or fact-free crusades which are going to surface as his contract moves to its completion.

These theories simply do not seem to correspond with the facts where WM has played this past season (and previously for the Bills) where he took a hard hit that knocked him out a game and was on the injury reports the next week and practiced little or not at all, but he strapped it on and played the next weekend. These types of efforts do not seem to be ones which indicate disinterest (and few would mistakes the Bills for being much of a winner the last couple of years. In addition to these performances, in a game this season WM managed to put out enough juice to finish a long run with a TD and then puked his guts out soon afterwards. A player would have been justified calling it a day at that point sd he was clearly sick and had shone quite well even if he played no more. A disinterested player likely would have sat it out, but he strapped it on and came back in. He struggled almost completely with pass blocking last year (as most young RBs do) but though he still can improved, he pulled off one play this year amidst the early Bills losing streak where he blocked not one but actually two players effectively on the same play. Overall, WM has carried the load in a number of games in terms of making a lot of rushes. Further his mo has been in several games to get stopped and stopped again in his first rushes, but finally as the D wears down from getting pounded he has gotten his yards late in the game and did not lose interest due to a lack of success. Folks seem to attrbute motives to WM based on how they perceive his body language and based on their own sense of how hard he is hitting the hole when they really have no way of knowing for sure what his mindset is. The events do not seem to be consistent with those of a disinterested player. He may be but likely this view says more about the attitude of the observer than it does about WMs attitude.

How we fans "judge" a player to be prior to and on draft day is pretty irrelevant then and it is less important now, The real deal is whether we built a good team with the draft, player development, trades, UDFAs or whatever. Whitner clearly was an impact player on the 2006 Bills squad which improved not only the record of the team from 5-11 to 7-9 but did this against opponents who actually had a good record of production this year (half of our games were against teams which made the playoffs including the 5 top seeds in the AFC and the top seed in the NFC). Is Whitner a Pro Bowl quality player or someone one would choose to call and NFL impact player? No! However, I think that the proper perspective on this question is who cares as the right questions are is this Bills team improving and was Whitner an important impact player in this improvement. I say that the answers to these two questions are emphaticallt YES and YES. Does anyone out there want to contend that this team which finished 7-9 is not better than and I would say significantly better than last year's team which finished 5-11? This current team has lots of failings and many things to work on from individual play to some questionable game calling decisions. However, I think its hard to look at this year's games and not recognize that with the transition from the failed TD reign of error, the devolving coaching situation which led to the resignation of MM and the prescense of a variety of players who did not want to be here and proved to be cancers (Moulds is a talented player but it was time for him to go after his unprofessional meltdown last year) this team is improved. Will they continue to improve? We'll see. There is a whole off-season and some critical decisions which will need to be made regarding FAs which will determine whether the improvement continues but do far the answer is that the team is inadequate but going in the right direction. The second question in assessing Whitner is whether he contributed to this improvement in a positive way. He started 15 games for the Bills and finished second on the team breaking the 100 tackle mark. The bottomline for a team is that a 1st round choice is expected to start and Whitner did that. In fact given that he teamed with Simpson as the only rookie safety combo in the NFL. I think this defines not only the choice having a positive impact on the Bills but the Marv led draft yielded not 1 but actually 4 players who won starting jobs on this team which improved a lot over last years model (Youbouty and Ellison won starting jobs after injuries but the other 4 will likely win starting jobs over other players currently on the roster. I think if a draft even produced a couple of starters by the end of the year it would be considered a good one. Given that over 1/3 of the defense consists of starters drafted this year, I think it was a great draft for us. Could it have been better? Sure! However, this is little more than fantasy league stuff of remote interest to the real world of football. The judgment about whether

The write up on the Bill's Daily site describing why we ended up with the #12 pick actually left me feeling a bit better about the irritation of my team failing to put up a winning record. Our record sucked this season and there are no two ways about that. However. since we did not (nor were we good enough to deserve to) make the playoffs our season is over this year. So it is reasonable IMHO to turn our attention to next year and the analysis of the quality of the teams we loss to is a reasonable consideration and more than the mere apologies and excuses if they were offered to assess our chances this year. We lost this year. but like all sports fans, wait til next year is a legit cry and the assessment is actually quite hopeful. 1. Getting the higher pick because we lost the last two games actually helps a bit. The pundits shat all over Marv for having a lousy draft, but not only did the draft weekend analysis on TSW indicate that it was the pundits who actually probably had their heads up their butt, but the results of this year underscored the utility of the draft for the Bills. Not only did every player make the roster but in fact all but OL player Aaron Merz were active and saw some game action. Not only was the Marv led group making at least rational picks (which some pundits claimed they did not) in fact 6 of the 9 picks actually started games and having beaten out other players were certainly useful picks for the Bills. Even better than the booby prize of getting a 7-9 pick rather than 8-8 (I am one who would have rather seen us win a meaningless game and get a worse pick if I had my druthers) was that actually we were the strongest 7-9 team in the league based on opponents' records. In fact fully half our games were against teams which made the playoffs though only 12 of 32 teams made the playoffs. We logged our 7-9 record playing and losing to the top 5 seeds in the AFC and against Chicago the top seed in the NFC. As we put up a 6-2 record against non-playoff teams, even this crew we fans found troubled is in far better shape than last year as we are at least among the better of the non-playoff teams. The Marv led draft picks had a lot to do with this. In terms of next season, I look at it this way in terms of our prospects (the actual dates and obviously make it to difficult to predict outcomes but a guesstimate on how competitive we will be can reasonably be done). Division games- We finished .500 this year being swept by NE and sweeping the Fins and we split with the Jets reversing the homefield advantage. Figuring us at 3-3 against this group next year is not unreasonable. Hpme games- Home field is not a guarantee of a victory (see Jets games, Houston and TN) but it is a leg up. I see us being competitive in all of these games and think if things are where they are now (they will not be) we actually should be favored in both games against non playoff teams (CIN, Den) and actually though Dallas and NYG made the playoffs neither of these teams scares me at all. Only against Baltimore do I fear we will lose even at home and as happened yesterday even in their house the game was competitive. So I feel good about a 4-1 record at home right now. Away games- As we saw in the Detroit game it is quite possible to lose to bad teams on the road. However, these games can be won if the situation is good. The good news is that only one of our road games is against a playoff team Philly and though if these two teams played today in Philly they would be favored this game is less scary to me than traveling to Baltimore yesterday. In the remaining 4 games, I think we may end up favored against a bad Cleveland team and maybe against a Skins team if they founder as they currently are. Jacksonville does not scare me even in their house and though Pitts does it obviously depends upon which Pitts team shows up. I feel fine right now about seeing us end up 3-2 at their house against non division teams (it is way early so I am hopeful even irrationally so). The bottomline is that I see at least a 10 win record against our opponents on the face of it and that should be good enough to crawl into the playoffs.

This play was discussed a bit on TSW yesterday with several praising WM for choosing to go OB and stop the clock as that was a smarter thing to do at the time rather than delivering a blow to an opponent (which can be fun to do) and not stopping the clock. My since is that whether he is interested in playing or not is likely a judgment in the viewers mind rather than being an accurate read on where he is unless one is a mindreader. The game plan seemed to go away from the run and emphasize passing the ball and this seemed to me to be the prime reason WM was not heavily involved in the game. I for one was glad to see Jauron more interested in winning the game rather than in making sure WM got more carries to break 1000 yards.

Its actually a question of who is playing hardball with whom. It takes two parties to make a deal and if the Bills and Fletcher have not concluded one then both parties lay claim to that outcome.

Interesting in its thoroughness if nothing else. A brief look at this though raises the question for me what do you have in mind for Fowler at C who got a long term contract from us last year with a bonus which indicates the plan was to keep him here for a while. Though his work would not be classified as great or the line even as very good by most, they clearly improved over last year's model and better play by Fowler replacing Teague was part of this improvement though the OL is not satisfactory yet. Given you did not release him or put him anywhere what is the plan here.

Actually a look at the game stats seems to indicate that about the same thing happened yesterday to the sackless Freeney that happened to the sackless Schobel (Freeney managed to log a mere two tackles compared to Schobel's mere one tackle though the Miami offense was shredded for 115 yards by Tins leading rusher Ronnie Brown compared to 69 for Lewis. In the big picture since drawing season long conclusions based on one game is foolish, Schobel simply produced way more sacks than Freeney this year. As sacks are an important but not the only or main indicator of performance, the fact Schobel also registered more tackles than Freeney and that Freeney was historically bad for him in registering lower marks in virtually all categories, it seems pretty clear that Schobel had a better year than Freeney and is a far better pick for the Pro bowl this year than Freeney playing in a hapless Indy D which once again is dragging this team down.

I think you made a key observation here when you posted above: the way fletcher did this year and ALWAYS has. and you also have to admit that a huge reason fletcher is making all those tackles is because our tackles can barely get a paw on someone as they fly by. You are right that the tackle numbers are not necessarily the major basis we should assess the quality of an individual player on as this number is greatly indluenced by the scheme a team plays, the quality of his teammates and also is a subjective judgment as to who gets credited with them or not. I think much more impressive for F-B is that this past year even moreso that his other years as a Bills shows objective indications of the diverse production which he brings to the field looking at objective indicative stats like INTs, TDs and sacks. Either a player tackles the opponent behind the LOS or not (and F-B even though being asked to bear a lot of downfield pass coverage responsibility in the Tampa 2 tied for 4th place on the team with his 2 sacks. Either you scored TDs or you do not and F-B according to Bills.com returned an INT for a TD and recovered a fumble for a TD. Either you intercept the ball or do not and F-B got more INTs than any other LB in the game and led the team in INTs (more than Clements for example). I'm not making this stuff up. The facts are what the facts are. You are also right that the question of where are we going with him at MLB is a key one as the proof is in the pudding and results ultimately matter. I am happy if we do get another MLB who will take us to the promised land. However, the simple question is WHO? What F-B has done is simply set a statistical standard which this new savior should beat (if he truly is as good as you want). This player not only will have to make a bunch of tackles at the LOS as you want and say F-B does not do, but he will have to do with another Bill being our team leading INT guy since F-B will be gone. The new guy you want will need to raise up our D so that it gets TDs and sacks from other folks or he produces them himself to replace F-Bs production. Regardless of how one judges his play subjectively, who is this player than you envision creating the measures of production which F-B produced, this inquiring mind would love to know and I fully embrace him coming here if we can pull this off. Instead, since I am not informed enough to say exactly who this wunderkind is, whae I do advocate is that I think it is quite possible that we can extend the contract of F-B himself (if he allows it) and actually since the rest of the NFL rates him as not being a Pro Bowl quality player we should be able to get him at an affordable price given that it looks like we will have a good chunk of cap room. I do not argue at all that we will get to the SB with Fletcher or even the playoffs (we have not so far). However, i do argue that rather than producing nothing we can be measured as some do (despite the fact this is counter to the facts) that he can be extended relatively cheaply and this will allow us to spend the far larger part of our cap on the players that will make the D perform better. How 'bout if we made a little investment in a DL that in fact can get a PAW on a rusher so that in fact Fletcher's tackle numbers drop. It seems like what you advocate in that we spend a chunk of change to get a better MLB is that this new player will also have a large number of tackles as our DL continues to fan on rushers who pour through the gap and get to our MLB. It seems what you are advocating is that we will get a replacement MLB who makes a bunch of tackles 4 or 5 yards downfield rather than 5 or 6 yards if that is what folks feel Fletcher does. Actually, to the extent this is true, the question is why? I submit that this occurs not because he is a weak player who cannot get to the point of attack closer to the LOS, but that our scheme the way we run it calls for Fletcher to cover an area downfield. Its called the Tampa 2 and the MLB in the Tampa 2 has the deep pass coverage responsibility with the two safeties. Fletch simply did what he supposed to do and actually did it quite well as he led the team in INTs. The D fell apart in several areas: 1. Our rookie safeties had a number of issues early in the season recognizing when WRs were running the fly pattern down the sideline and got over late. The irony here is that McGee often got blamed as the WR simply seemed to beat him flat out on the fly. However, my sense was that yes McGee did not do the right thing in not recognizing how late and out of position our young safeties were and thus he could not sit on routes inside as the Tampa 2 calls for him to do in theory as the CB really only has the short outside zone coverage. If Whitner is not there or Simpson is late, the vet mcGee is supposed diagnose that and not let the WR go. After some very bad outings against MN, DET, and HE the second time we seemed to rectify this. 2. We got shredded on the run but actually this was not F-Bs prime responsibility in the Cover 2 we run (everyone is ultimately responsible for tackling the runner so F-B like other fails as a team when the team gets run on). However, in the Tampa 2 his primary responsibility on potential passing downs was in deep and mid-zone coverage and he deserves kudos for doing that job to the extent he led the team in INTs. He is an LB and obviously has LOS responsibilities and occaisional blitz work since throwing change-ups is always important to combat an O. However, to the extent Fletch got some sacks and FRs the indicator is he did this job as well to the extent he was a team leader in these other objective categories. My sense is that complaints about fletcher making tackles downfield is simply a side effect of our DTs being ineffective against the run at the LOS too often and us running a scheme which mandated that he hold that middle area where he is accused of making late tackles. My sense is that if he were detailed to play more at the LOS and get earlier tackles that the offense would simply say thank you very much and instead throw short passes to the midzone left uncovered by F-B coming to the LOS or more screens which would either induce him in on a rush and the QB throws over him or multiple blockers are out there to attack him or another line pinching player.

I agree with the theory, but after the Bills commited a chunk of value to buy FA Triplett and draft/use Williams/McCargo it hard for me to see them devoting the huge salary cap value we have again on the DL (though we need it there). I think it makes sense for us to resign are own NC and Fletcher but the acquisitions after that probably go to making sure we have through the draft or by an FA acquisition we get Fletcher's replacement in place. I think the models are we look for a late first day pick at LB along the Crowell line to train as heir apparent at MLB for 2008 or 09 at the latest. My sense is we would have to get a young vet LB at FA who does not expect that he will be an immediate star at MLB (if he does then why sign behind Fletcher) but has definite prospects in our opinion so he is worth getting (the next Bryce Paup for example).

MY (and quite frankly all the fan predictions) are pretty worthless as they are dictated by Ralph's seemingly sometimes Alzheimer like responses and what I think is logical from a football point of view is certainly not done. However, though I see little consistency in what Ralph and the Bills do, I do have my own fact-challenged opinions of what they should do. 1. I think they shold resign Nate. A. He has produced in a lot of areas. B. There is no one of the roster who can produce the same amount at MLB even if you think he sucks. C. It is incredibly doubtful that a draft pick will give you the same production at MLB (if you think so then please name the person). D. An FA vet pick-up can likely do the job, but this acquisition likely involves a total remake of the teamto whatever extent the vet needs to learn the Jauron/Fewel D which will depend alot on this centerpiece. E. Even if you acquire a new centerpiece you are wholly dependent on this one player remaining healthy which is a tough bet given that we have seen two LBs end up on IR these last two seasons. F. He actually can be relatively cheaply signed as he is underrated by the NFL having never made the Pro Bowl and he is an older player that no team can build around. He has value as the missing piece for a team for a run next year, but little future as a building block. In summary, he has value for the Bills he does not have for others as there is no learning curve time for us that he would have for a new team. Also, while it makes little sense to plan on him being there for several years, it is workable for him to counted upon to provide us with two years. We would draft/acquire his replacement in the off-season and he is there to break-in or cushion this your acquisition and year after next we phase the other guy in and phase him out. I suspect the Bills will want to and have to do this, however, the additional wild card is that he is an FA and will have a major shared say with the Bills as to whether he returns. I think he will like to come back despite his not saying much about his future situation as Fletcher seems to be motivated by other things such as his seminary commitment rather than the typical sports achievement motivation. He hired Rosenhaus and may well go elsewhere, but its hard to imagine this is the understanding between Ralph and Fletcher given the two apparently have a close relationship personally and the Bills really have made themselves quite dependent on him coming back OR really investing heavily for a replacement. 2. I also think they go after NC to come back as doing this solves a lot of the Bills problems in terms of setting the D up. If they re-acquire NC then we are essentially set at CB with two former Pro Bowl starters at CB, Youbouty in the wings as the likely nickel and heir apparent in case of injury with potential first round talent and we have a host of other folks like Greer, Thomas. If instead we let NC go, all of these guys in the wings are asked to step up which maybe they can do but maybe they can't. if we resign NC then we are not only set at CB but even can deal if the injury bug happens to strike. Alternately if we let him go then the whole situation is uncertain. Overall, with both these players, it involves paying them salaries which seem to be higher than their output on the free market, but it looks like we will have the cap room to get 'er done. I hope the Bills do this, but to me they already should have extended them if the followed this logic so it seems like something else in the offing.

While only the Bills disappointed me because I want them to win, I voted for Denver because this self-inflicted wound as they went through the pain associated with giving a QB time to be ineffective cost them the playoffs in the final regular season game.

He led this team and LBs in the NFL with interceptions with 4. He scored TDs on an INT return and a fumble recovery. He registered 2 sacks tieing for 4th on the team. He led the team by far being credited with 146 tackles (101 0f them solo tackles which makes the complaint of some about him racking up tackles downfield a bit odd in that even if true if he wasn't there on those plays no telling how far the opponent would have gotten and this complaint strikes me as more of an indictment of a DL which was breeched so that an LB on the next level took the runner down without assistance. Like it or not, folks who advocate letting him walk need to suggest how we are going to replace this production if they want their comments to be taken seriously. Given that behind him on the depth chart are the too oft injured DiGregorio, and the two best LBs in the past whom folks talk about filling the role are both recovering from injuries, resigning Fletcher seems to be a flat-out priority for this team unless there is a specific plan to replace him and his production. In particular since he is so underrated in the NFL (as he has never been selected to the Pro Bowl even when he tied Spielman for the record in tackles) and also may come with a bit of a discount in the market due to his age, those who would not resign him have a lot of splainin to do for this opinion not to simply be disregarded.

I was one of those people who liked Travis H. as a player and defended the hated TD for his initial decision to keep Travis and talk about making it work with both of them and stuck to his guns and kept him until the deal he wanted came through rather than cutting him. However, as much as I like Travis as a player, I did (and actually still do since i do not think the last chapter is written yet regarding assessing these two players) support the idea of the surprise drafting of WM and the decision to go with WM rather than Travis as our future back. Knowing what we knew at the time, the upside of going with WM was pretty clear once our docs made the judgments they made (and again still seems to offer more in terms of WMs prospects and potential as a player than TH IMHO despite an inspired TH being the better back last Sunday. Specifically. 1. Once the docs made an assessment that WM with solid rehab and the effort he made to present himself as still a viable #1 pick, the upside of getting a talent once thought to be among the top 5 players with a #18 pick was a smart thing for the Bills to do. 2. My sense is that the handwriting was on the wall for Bills insiders that TH was a great player who was a taco short of a combination plate mentally as apparently was reflected in the article which featured his tricked out SUV with rap tunes playing at supersonic levels. This in itself is no problem for me as long as a player remains productive on the field (for example I would never sleep with WM given his baby momma comments if I were a gal, but I do not care as long as he performs activities like being the fastest Bill RB to gain 2000 yards on the ground or is successful today in pulling off 3 consecutive 1000 yard campaigns). However, it was likely clear to TD and those who knew TH personally that activities like the mismanagement of a significant chunk of chamge which forced him to delay his FA time by a year in return for chump change from the Bills was an even better indicator of a level of immaturity which got him suspended for four games when he went to TN. Its good that he seems to have wised up and can play, but I am glad we did not have to live through this behavior by our #1 RB. Its great Travis is putting up very good numbers again, but people seem to be panicking to me to even decide he is a better back than WM for sure (WM has had a better two years than Travis overall since the trade and a much better last three years in total even though Travis had a better year this year). Quite frankly given we have had such a struggling QB last season and the first half of this one, and OL issues which are still only getting better just now, I think it really has been quite impressive that WM is on the verge of his 3rd straight 1000 yard rushing campaign even though he missed significant game time in both of those campaigns. I doubt he will ever prove to be the best RB in the NFL as he credibly was threatening to do prior to his injury. However, IF: 1. Given a full season with a the capable JP who has developed. 2. Given that the OL is finally shaping up into a stable productive unit, 3. Given that Fairchild has yet to actually demonstrate he is capable of running his O properly yet and if he does he will utilize WM at least somewhat as a receiving threat which will help his run game alot. I think it is premature to declare this trade a mistake. If one chooses to restrict this judgment to one weekend or even one season i agree with this conclusion, however if you compare the production of these two mem over the three years they both could play then i think there is little question WM was more productive. As far as the future goes, who can predict it but all in all I would rather face it with WM as my RB than Travis.

I hope you are right if this is what we decide or are forced into if F-B decides to go elsewhere. The thing which I find so silly is that some on this board seem to offer it up as a deadlock certainty that Fletch is gone or even feel this is a good move which will make the Bills better, but the offer up no thought whatsoever on whether on whether regardless of how bad they judge Fletch to be whether we are going to have a better team by replacing this "bad" player. Again regardless of what judgements folks make about Fletcher, there is no back-up for him on this roster, the two most likely new MLBs on the roster in terms of knowing the position so that they can do the playcalling are both recovering from injury (Crowell has the training and TKO is was our most talented LB prior to injury). It is certainly possible that a rookie can have the skillset to do the starting MLB job, but if the requirement is that in order for the Bills to fill the gap left by fletch leaving, they need to draft a Shawn Merrimen LT quality player with their mid round 1st, this does not seem like a winning strategy to say the least. Getting an FA vet seems like a more plausible approach theoretically. However, the Bills would need to target a specic vet who has shown the intellect to lead the team and do playcalling and it is to be hoped is familiar with the Jauron/Fewell system as he is gonna be required to step in and master it at almost a DC-like level to do the playcalling. Its fine with me if folks want to say as many bad things about F-B's play against the run as they want (though such tirades conveniently ignore little facts like his amazing number of credited tackles the last 6 years, the fact that he is among the team leaders in a broad range of numeric categories from defensive TDs to INTs and sacks). However, posts which make this point, are simply reduced to tirades which are easily ignored or the usual fact-free opinion we all have a right to when this rant is not joined with some fairly specific suggestions about how they are going to make this team better as all the real alternatives I see to this "bad" player are simply worse.

Thanks for the observations, as I made a similar read on the situation (though the Whitner info is new to me). I think obviously the Bills can deal with a post F-B reality, but I think your thoughts are an indicator that this action is not a simple one to understand or prescribe what will happen. I like the idea of giving Fletch a big contract which is incentive laden. If he does cave in as folks seem to expect his post 3oish body to do then fine you do not pay him, but if he plays at the current level which no one claims is perfect, but is central to the Bills in terms of real world diverse stats he produces (he not only is a tackle credited machine, but he also has also has figures leading or in the high reaches for the team in terms of D TDs produced, sacks, INTs, etc). We will simply deal with it if Fletch and his hired gun Rosenhaus leave, but folks should not be under the illusion that this is going to be easy for us if he does. Ironically, even if he is as weak as some exremist seem to want to claim, the situation is that his replacements on board right now are almost certainly weaker than a player they judge to be substandard because of their youth and inexperience or are simply wildcards at this point due to issues of injury recovery. I am not saying he cannot be replaced because like it or not he will be. However. it is simply difficult to take any suggestion that he should not be resigned if we can swing it very seriously and more than fact-free fan ranting (to which we are all entitled to) unless they also want to suggest their credible plan for replacing him. Suggestions such as we draft a rookie MLB who would do this playcalling strike me as condemning the Bills to yet another playoffless year. Suggesting we sign a vet FA is certainly possible, but unless the poster has some specific suggestion of who this might be (and with it some suggestion of why this player should be reasonably expected to grasp and do proper playcalling for the Jauron/Fewell scheme) then the suggestions that our best alternative is to let him walk are simply meaningless.

All the speculation where most folks have Fletcher already out the door (which may be true since he calls the shots as an FA, though folks seeming to feel good about this is really left without explanation by posters who feel this way outside of their rants that F-B sucks) led to me to ask a question I do not know what the answer is. In the real world today, Fletcher calls the D signals for the Bills. As the MLB he is in the center of the field with the advanrages of having his voice carry mosty easily to both sides. In addition, he has visibility of the whole field from his middle position. Most important, he brings multiple years of having viewed plays and a demonstrated quick mind to the job. However, if he were to go down, his bsck-up on the depth chart remains the oft injured John DiGregorio. My assumption for most of the season was that in fact if anything from an injury, to food poisoning, to a death in the family, to the Rapture suddenly spiriting Fletcher and all believers away to paradise leaving the rest of us here (he is in training at seminary to be a minister) that Crowell who spent his initial years as F-Bs back-up before an injury to Spikes created a gap where as a better player than Haggan he took the field would have jumped to MLB to fill that spot. However, with Crowell on IR and the two safties both being rookies, I'm not even sure how we would have done (or do today if the worse were to occur) if F-B goes down. This I think is a useful consideration as it describes the quandary we face in FA this off-season regarding Fletch. Some folks may be happy to see him walk because they blame him for our weakness against the run (mostly without any substantiation actually and just their own fact-free opinion that he sucks and his tackles are racked up downfield). However, one gets pretty quickly to it does not matter as much if one feels he sucks, the real question is what is folks thought of replacing him with someone better even if he does suck. My sense is that on this roster: 1. Current back-up DiGregorio seems a too inexperienced and has really shown nothing in games to judge him as the heir apparent. 2. TKO and Crowell are easily the two best LBs on the roster with F-B, but some are calling for TKO's head (prematurely IMHO) and Crowell are both dealing with recovery and are wildcards for Fletch's field general role. 3. Ellison has stepped in to start as a rookie and has been a very pleasant surprise as a late round rookie choice. however, it seems doubtful to me he is ready for field general. 4. The remaining LBs have done well at ST, but remind me of Gilligan's Island for singing purposes, if one made up an introductory song about the LBs, most of these players would simply get the Prof. and Mary Anne treatment of being referred to "and the rest". 5. Some teams rely upon a vet safety to make the play calls if necessary, but we had to leave the TV era and start two rookies who also have stepped up admirably but it remains unproven whether either is ready to call plays if need be. Overall, if Fletch is allowed to walk, then I would suspect an FA LB cashes in big time for us, but what are folks thinking (or for those who so blithely seem to say don't let the door hit you on the way out to Fletch, are these folks thinking at all)?

This sounds like a disaster to me which would make next season a rough experiment at best (this is even assuming that the Bills somehow find the rookie equivalent of LT as a player at MLB and somehow get TKO to recover fully or Crowell to recover fully and have play calling done by an OLB since I do not see a rookie taking on that task and our safties having trouble taking it on in their second full years). Which rookie did you specifically have in mind at MLB?

I think this post among others seriously underrates Fletcher in terms of his importance to the Bills and what we will need to do in terms of needing several things all to work out in order to replace him on this team. This is not to say that I think Fletcher is the top LB in the game (since folks seem to love to adopt the same tactic as the modern political media ranters like Fox News or Lou Dobbs and assume the most extreme version of opposing views and attack them as though that undercuts all opposing views), it is simply saying that folks seem to want to assess F-B as being so horrible when the stats and a balanced view does not indicate that is so. Specifically: 1. The rant that he makes most of his tackles 5 or 6 downfield is actually a pretty superficial analysis of what this means or in fact if it really is what is happening. Its hard to know where to begin in terms of describing the faultiness of this point as an indictment of Fletcher. A. If he in fact leads the team in tackles but a majority of them happen downfield this is more of an indictment of the DL than F-B. In order for him to make a tackle so far downfield it simply raised the question as to what happened to our DL that he routinely is tackling players relatively deep in the second tier beyond the LOS. Even if he makes his first contact 3 yards deep and is such a bad tackler he gets dragged 3 yards, this view (which is unsupported by an stat I have seen) is far more an indictment of the DL than F-B or the CBs for failing to contain outside runs. B. If in fact he is making contact and racking up tackles downfield unless the players are running right at him this view of him making most of his tackles downfield is actually a compliment to his speed, mobility, and doggidness as he clearly is tracking down runners who have escaped other Bills to tackle them six yards downfield. C. If he is in a hole at the LOS and is being dragged downfield by tacklers this seems to indicate a problem with the Bills D scheme as they are commiting their MLB to line play and leaving the middle to safety coverage amd keep commiting a player some judge as weak for this responsiblity. Actually this view would indicate a real misunderstanding of the scheme as actually F-B has mid zone pass protection duty in the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2. 2. The view of F-B as such a weakness simply ignores the stats. I agree that the tackle stats are not perfect, but they are certainly better than fact free opinion even if they are not perfect and most of these indictments are not supported by any facts or analysis. A. He simply has led the Bills in tackles each year he has been here. This has to mean something but folks simply seem to dismiss it. In fact, he has tied Spielman for the record of most tackles in one season and like it or not it is a demonstration that F-B is in on a lot of plays and has a nose for the ball. B. A look at the stats for tackles this year presents the interesting nugget that the vast vast majority of his tackles are credited as solo tackles. This factoid is important as it is an indicator that maybe he is not the weak tack;er which some folks seem to imply as he brought them down (even belatedly for some) without any help. Even more important for those who wish to blame him for the Bills shortcomings against the run is the fact that if he were not there for this solo tackle then perhaps many of these guys he brought down would still be running since no there Bill got there to even register an assist. C. My recollection is that F-B actually was credited with more tackles than any other player in the NFL for the 5 years ending last season combined. I have yet to see a summary for this year but given his leading the Bills with being credited with what will be approaching 150 tackles likely be in the lead for combining the last 6 seasons. This is not only good praise for his durability but the quality of his work over that time. 3. The concept that he is overrated simply flies in the face of the fact he has never made the Pro Bowl despite these glossy stats. An argument that insiders know something we do not know (though I have heard nothing but praise from insiders on the team and opposing coaches like Belicheck) so he isn't that good makes more sense than a claim he is overrated because he simply is not valued as being more than a top 10 LB and not one of the top 5 by pundits. 4. The claim he has captained a contiuously failing D ignores the fact the D was actually quite productive statistically for a couple of those years (they were ranked #5 in the NFL statistically in 2003 and #2 in 2004. What explanation do folks give for differences in F-Bs play between the badly performing Ds (2005 and 2006 and actually both phases of the game were bad in 2002 but the D actually carried this RJ led team to even get 3 victories and play a number of close games for 3 quarters til they ran out of gas). 5. In addition to the D, F-B has done the unusal for a starter and has been a critical player to the ST several years. In 2003 or 4 (I can't remember which) he was the second leading KO return guy on the Bills behind McGee and fielded the short kickoffs and not only did not fumble but even returned them well for the Bills. Folks who want to badmouth him should acknowledge this reality and contribution. Overall, he is one of the Bills who has his head screwed on straight and is in the game and understands it most of the time. When there is a problem is interesting to see F-b routinely be the one on top of the game situation almost immediately and not only making a point as though he understands what is in the Bills interest but often hitting up the right ref about the debated call right away. 6. Even if one judges F-B to be bad, how confident our folks that his likely replacement Crowell (he was a back-up MLB before being forced into the lineup by TKOs injury) is not only going to play this position regularly competently (I think he can) but will also be ready to go at the opening kick as he got IR'ed (who besides the Bills docs have a clear estimation) the same equation comes into play for those who suggest TKO take over for him (he still needs to show he can handle the move to the other side at OLB which apparently was done so he would have to cover less space and now folks want him to range from sideline to sideline as MLB. The other choice seems to be DiGregorio or some unknown FA which may make 07 another learning year for the Bills. 7. Complaints about his inability to shed blockers flies in the face of his Bills setting record first season when our DL was so weak. F-B too often had an OL player assigned specifically to block him as our DL could be handled one on one. Further, his stacking up a vast vast majority of solo tackles among his stops speaks to him making the tackle and likely shedding a block if necesaey to make the tackle on his own. Again F-B is not the best LB in the MFL and many years not even in the AFC, but by far he is one of the best D players on the Bills and his lost would move next season backwards as much as losing most individual players on the team.

This also goes to show how a player is used within an O has much to do with his stats. No doubt that PP has lost a step or two from his youth and haydays with the Bills (is there anyone out there who has not lost a step as they aged?). However the way players can keep going for a long period of time is that they change their game to take advantage of their increased experience. In some ways this describes Peerless though overall I think that its gone to an extreme which indicates to me that Fairchild could have either used him more appropriately or if the Bills insist on using their #2 primarily as a possession receiver, they should of.could have gone after a player like FA Joe Jurivicious, 45 catches (with a game to go) is a nice number of catches for a #2 and is not a surprise to me as though some posters seemed to look at PP's speed and the year he suffered a few bad fumbles in critical situations and somehow concluded PP was a wimp. On the contrary, PP's fumbles that year generally seemed to come when he actually was being too tough and making a second effort with a tackler wrapped around his ankle picking up a couple of meaningless yards. He got clocked as the hanger on set him up for a second tackler and left me wishing he was more of a wimp and simply went down with the first hit rather than getting clocked. What I think this comes down to is that Fairchild runs his version of the St. L offense so speed receivers like Evans, the ol' Peerless and Parrish are attractive tp him. However, he is trying to make it different by utilizing more ball control which seems to be greater use of the TE (not hard compared to the Rams), and more possession work. Fairchild made greater use of PP in the possession role this year and PP did step up to the plate as seen in his good number of catches and his showing some nice skill work like in some his footwork on TD catches. However, though he has lost a step, he had a good speed base to work from and I think as shown in a few of his longer receptions this year and the one bomb he caught in pre-season I think he could have been used more as a =downfield threat.

Do you really think that these people getting by far the largest paychecks they have ever gotten in their lives and to get this huge largesse for playing a boys game really adds up in real life or even in their minds to having "nothing to show for it"? Granted their potentially (and actually probably in NC's case) greener pastures to show for their play elsewhere in terms of a big contract. In addition, one clear way of becoming a great athlete for these by definition incredibly competitive people is to constantly aspire for the next big thing and the big contract which goes with it. However, the "new" reality of the NFL (which in fact has always been there), but now a single multi-year contract and certainly a second one, allows a player to focus more of their thinking and effort on their entire lives rather than just simply football. I think one of the unplanned for side effects of the new CBA and the much larger and more equitable distribution of the NFL big bucks to the players is that situations like the Tiki Barber one where a player clearly has several productive years of football left, but they walk away from the game if they see other important things to them they can do may in fact become the rule rather than the exception. Particularly with Fletcher-Baker who seems to be most committed to his work to graduate from school and become a minister and has made basic life moves like hyphenating his last name to honor one of his grandfather's I would not be surprised if the lead determing factor for his choice about whether to leave or stay is actually where he plans to do his ministry work rather than simply who offers the biggest contract. Assuming the Bills want him (which given our lack of a quality back-up for him and actually the most talented Bill with MLB experience Crowell coming off an injury which forced him to IR I assume we will want a starting quality MLB badly) we may well have a leg up because he has built his life around being linked to this area for the last 5 years. However, I believe LF-B is attending a seminary based in Ohio and I would not be surprised if the lead factor determining FA decisions for him is that the left coast is out of the question regardless of what he is offered by a team out there and perhaps his life choices will even take him away from Buffalo.

This would be particularly true if he has a wife or significant other here who does not want to or cannot move away from her family because of parental illness or another issue. Who knows as generally I do not have a soap opera interest in our players personal lives, but the ironic thing can be that a players' FA decisions can be strongly influenced (if not in some extreme cases driven) by personal relationships and what is good for them. This is not a rule (there is no one size fits all rule despite the protests of us little brained humans that there can only be one "right" explanstion for what ends up being a complex situation with many influencing factors. I do not even know if NC has built familial ties to the area and if so whether this hypothetical partner has anything that urges or forces them to be here in WNY in an increasingly mobile world. However, just as these life demands and issues has resulted in JMac wanting to come to Buffalo to retire, Marvin Lewis not wanting to come here because his wife wanted their kids to be schooled elsewhere or Ruben Brown still making his home here because his kids do not want to shift schools to Chicago, it is amazing how much the judgments we watchers make based on what makes football sense are strongly influenced by issues we cannot see or calculate at all.

One of the main reasons that I doubt the Bills would commit a 1st to an FB (almost regardless of how good he is) is that his singluar talents (as a pro he would likely be need to be utilized as an H-Back in a hybrid O which provides opportunities to get him the ball more and sometimes even lines him up as a slot receiver) is that the Bills have no #2 of a similar skillset to plug in for him when he gets dinged and goes out to recover, to give him a blow occaisionally or if gosh forbid he were to get IR'ed. The Bills O is not set up to utilize Leonard's skills well and i do not see the Bills altering their O to take advantage of 1 players skills particularly for when the unplanned for happens we are then forced to rely on a Damon Shelton or a Brad Cieslak to make our offense work.

Actually, when one looks at what he said and stack up the competition which can be reasonably considered to meet this criteriam there actually is not much competition so WM arguably qualifies. If one considers the last few years to be the three seasons WM playedm then a reasonable starting point is that in order to be considered as among the best RBs in these three years, then you should have put up at least a 1,000 yards rusching in all three of these seasons. Doing this in my mind does not gurantee you a conclusion that you were a top RB these three years, but if you did not then it would seem reasonable to me not to consider you to be one of the best at all over the last few years (do you disagree and want to claim an RB with less than a 1,000 is one of the best over these three years. The first important thing in my mind is that WM ain't there yet unless he gains 33+ yards in Balt. He likely will but given injuries and a good Ravens D this is not a dealock certainty. The second thing though is that looking at these last few year, LaDamian, Tiki Barber, Rudi Johnson, Edgerrin Jamed and Warrick Dunn are the 5 other RCs who have three 1,000 yard years, Having membership (assuming he gets a few more yard on Sunday) includes WM in this elite group in terms of on-filed achievement over the last few years. My sense is that clearly WM lags in the back of this group in terms of production as an RB as the Bills have never found an effective way to use him as a pass catcher and he does not pose enough of a consistent ground threat to make it something one can overlook. However, I (like many others) had really assumed his career was over when he suffered a tremendous injury at the end of his college career and the fact that he has come back to likely be one of few RBs to rush for 1000 yards on the ground three straight seasons is darn impressive. I think labeling him as one of the best RGs the last few years is arguably true. To claim he is the best would be laughable over even in the top 5 would be a stretch but once one made claims about the details such as him having little consistent TD production then one opens as fair game also taking into account that he has always played with QBs who could best be called troubled and an O-line which has simply sucked a large part of his career. If in fact, one believes JP has improved enough to be a real consistent threat throwing next year and that our OL is going to be better finally if not even good, then having the hope that WM can actually produce as a top 5 RB is not only reasonable but actually even likely if he remains healthy,