Pyrite Gal

The other piece of the Browns being so snakebitten is that given Fowler startting for us and former Brown center Jeff Faine apparently starting for the Saints, this team may lose their center and have two fomer centers starting elsewhere.

It does not sound very educated to me but that seems to be par for the course with PFW.

Yep, he does. I think it relates specifically to him hating to pay money to someone to simply sit. 1. Flutie and the Bills locked up a playoff spot with a game left in '99 regular season. The Bills rested Flutie (a good move as the munchkin clearly was became less effective throwing the ball as the season went on) and RJ piled up some great stats against an Indy team which stopped trying hard as soon a key player went down with an injury and it became clear from the scoreboard that even if they eked out a victory on the Bills they would not improve their playoff position. Ralph made a number of very positive statements about RJs performance and RJ became the starter in our infamous Homerun Throw-up game. It was not a situation like a Jerry Jones in Dallas where he intruded and made a coaching decision. I think the most appropriate comments from him would have been something along the lines that the team won and he is pleased and its totally a coaches decision. In that context he is pleased about RJ's performance, its up to the HC and he like other Bills fans will find out on Sunday about the starters at evert position. Ralph's comments as I remember them were neither the exteme of a Jones like intrusion or the non-commital happiness of any fan after a win who awaits the football professionals decision as to who starts/ I define this middle ground (which as the owner he can do what he wants so be it if this is his style) as meddling. 2. Ralph got directly involved in the the final FA negotiations on Jimbo's salary in the mid-90's Again this is his perogative as it is his money, but Ralph directly entered this negotiation making a football assessment of how long Jim had left and reached a "handshake" agreement to reward Jimbo when he signed his next long-term deal, His assessment was totally wrong as Jimbo was forced to retire bu the collected hits he took over the years and a final concussive blow from Jax that saw him leave the game ignominiously on a golf cart. I think this handshake deal actually violated the salary cap as he essentially promised to compesate Jim for play one year in the next cap year and i would not be surprised if sour grapes from his peers over this and other judgements are why he has not gotten the HPF honor he deserves. Again rather than leaving these negotiations to the professionals like Butler he meddled and blew it. 3. A piece of non-player idiocy but an example of the same behavior on Ralph's part was his handling of the Wade Phillips firing. He did not meddle persee as the hiring/firing of the front office is his perogative. However, I think this is an example of how money to guys sitting at home drives him wild and he pursued an arbitration to try to recover Wade's additional year on his contract even though all the professional told him he would lose. He lost. One can define the semantics anyway one wants and again he has the ownership and the bucks so he can be stupid if he chooses. However, from the above specific examples to actions like him printing an open letter to fans whining about the lack of attendance and automatic sell-outs like those in our SB years which ignored the fact the Bills put a bad product on the field, Ralph is highly and heavily involved in all aspects of this franchise and on issues like who should start, he takes actions which while thankfully they fall short of Jerry Jones like replacement of the coaches perogative for his constitute meddling in my mind.

I think it shows the intellect that Pro Football Weekly brings to the table in that Holcomb: 1. Finished the season as the starting QB for the Bills. 2. Is listed as the starter on the Bills deoth chart. One can rag on him or the Bills all you want but I at least expect some accuracy from an alleged football journal. They should be telling us why Losman is the #32, # 15 or whatever ranking they give him as a back-up rather than making an editorial judgment that not even the Bills temselves are capable of making at this point of choosing who is the starting QB or who is the back-up on this team.

My sense was that the major drive behind TD decisions and issue you do not mention at all was that he was badly bruised by being run out of town in Pitts by Cowher and essentially fired by a guy he hired. It's hard for me to imagine any human being not be somehow effected by this trauma and for it not to effect his future activities in some way. I think TD pledging NEVER AGAIN to himself had a significant effect on his actions either conciously or unconciously do. Do you agree and if so how do you factor this factor I think drives many things into your analysis. I see the effect of this on many of his decision: 1. TDs first and pre-eminent mistake in my assessment was hiring GW over John Fox and/or not working very hard to get Marvin Lewus here instead of GW. I think the facts simply are that GW, defensive genius that he is was not productive with the Bills both Fox and Lewis proved to be extremely effective in the two HC jobs they took, A lot of this can simply be blamed on Fox/Lewis not interviewing as well as GW, Could be and TD simply screwed up in his HC assessment. However, I think additional actions by TD show fairly clear evidence of his defensiveness and I think the base of the problems was like many human beings he stunk because he reacted poorly to getting fired and beat. 2. A big piece of evidence of TD GMing not to get blamed and to be sure of beating his HC if again it came down to a fight is to see how TD managed the team early on. He seemed to take the tact of putting resources in place to compensate for what in hindsight to us outsiders were obvious examples of GW failings. Yet, even though TD took action to allow a GW to fix problems if he were aggressive or good, TD would noy pull the trigger many times to force changes. Even worse, he would "suggest" alternative approacges, but then would allow GW to make his own bed and then take the blame when it turned out the bed was made poorly. Examples of this were: A. GW was allowed (encouraged?) to hire a staff which had no one on it with past HC experience or could even remotely be a successor/challenger to GW. It is reasonable to let your guy do things he wants to do without a lot of meddling. However, the first GW staff was so young, inexperienced and full of first timers it is shocking his boss TD even let him get away with hiring this type of crew. Worst of all GW was allowed to hire his buddy Vinky as the OL coach even though Vinky had zero experience as an OL position coach. Methinks TD had to see this too, but seemed quite content to let GW fail because it guaranteed he would not be in a position to run TD out of town. 2. TD and circumstances did force HW to fire Sheppard (with time left on his contract) and TD's guy as a replacement was apparently Clements. However, TD aceeded to the wishes of GW and hired Kevin Killdrive a guy whom TD had to no his weakenesses well. TD seemed almost gleeful when he let GW go and hired MM as he noted that TC was his choice and Killdrive was GW's. Again even worse, TD seemed to see prior to the 2003 season that the O was going to get into trouble at the OC soit and an old buddy of his who was a former OC was hired as the RB coach. Yet, in 2003 when Killdrive clearly needed to be reined in and forced to diversify the playcalling after numerous passeds on third and short, GW never forced Killdrive to change or strip him of the playcalling duty even though TD had hired a guy at RB coach who was already on the staff and had done the job before. 3. One of the worst and clear episodes of TD's defensiveness came when GW had the temerity to step into the GM's contract signing area and announce publicly that Larry Centers would be a Bill as long as he wanted to be. It took a bout a week but it was soon announced that Sam Gash had been signed to be our FB and much to Centers surprise as expressed in an Empire TC interview, he was cut. Either GW was a lying sack of whatever or he was totally out of the loop on fundamental roster issues. In the end, i think that the Bills problems under TD was not in many of the particulars you describe but actually even the true items you mention were simply symptoms of a larger and very human disease TD had which in hindsight doomed him to being ieffective as a team leader and GM from the start. As with many people TDs big failing was probably fear. TD was too busy trying to make sure he could win a battle with someone he hired that he never really took the risks necessary to hire someone who might prove to be so successful that he could challenge TD. I think that was the big problem and a real assessment of his impact.

I would guess that a municipality such as Buffalo which contracts with Adelphia to be the sole provider of cable service to the City should be guaranteed by contract to be provided the same service by a new cable operator such TW or has the ability to reopen their contract to new bidders. If this is the case officials in Buffalo should have some ability to plead/force the new cable company to provide services like access to Canadian channels and various Bills coverage. I also wonder if Adelphia/TW annonced some date for the switch. We would seem to be close enough to football season that I would not be surprised if a switch in channel provision and the switch over to new customer service regimes and decisions about which empoyees and operation sites to keep or let go takes a few months to iron out before change is rained upon us measly viewers. TW woild certainly be cruising for a maximum bruising and create a moment for greatest political leverage to try to make switches in the midst of the football season.

The interesting thing to me was that MM was so committed, resolute and strong in 2004 after the team had a horrendous start and many of those around him were panicking and ready to throw Bledsoe, Henry, and anything under the bus, MM generally stuck to his guns and stuck with Bledsoe, his scheme, and even let Henry start a game longer than he should have over McHajee. In 2005 MM was jerking Losman on and off the field and change hurt the team. My guess was that playing Losman and the cut of Bledsoe was TD's operation, probably with Ralph's OK at ;east if not his meddling. I hope this year that Ralph stays occurpied getting NYS taxpayers to ship a load of corporate welfare west to the Bills and Buffalo in the form of a state based stadium authority which can put up the capital for a new stadium at far more beneficial loan rates than the private sector and backs it with interest payments from across the state which ships more monet our way for our team.

My sense of the upsides and downsides at QB are these: 1. Losman- Lead candidate for the starting slot as his age and demonstrated athleticism which brought him a 1 st round choice give him signficantly higher than the other two. Nevertheless he was simply adrift at times last year and a question remains whether this was due to his youth and overall team dysfunction providing a poor context for development, or is it due to some basic lacking in him as a player which cannot be developed out of him. I do not think anyone really knows and what happens will simply tell which is true. He can actually get much better quickly if the game simply slows down for him as it does for many NFL players. Even if he still is not immediately perfect or even very good he can suddenly clearly be on the right track in terms of production quickly. However, there is a significant possibility that this may never be the case or that it may not be the case for him yet so one cannot simply assume or even ascribe a majority chace that he will prove to be an adequate starter this year. He has shown some positive development as a player from better production as a mop-up his rookie year after he was thrown to the wolves in NE and from some good showings of chemioctry against Miami with new #1 WR Evans. I think he is the lead candidate among the three though it is more likely he will need more time and work as a player before he can be deemed an adequate NFL starting QB. 2. Holcomb- He simply has not shown the consistency as a performer or in terms oh is health to be an NFL starting QN, though clearly with some great episodic performances and growing experience he can get the job done in spurts. This may well be his year IF the Bills succed under Fairchild in successfully designing, installing and implementing an O much like the highflying St. L O under Martz which Fairchild most recently came out of. Holcomb should have the judgment and ability based on his lengthy experience to hit the short passes necessary to make this O work IF other pieces fall into place: A. Our OL has clearly better starters this year with Gandy/Retes/Fowler/Villarial/Peters than we had last year with Gady/Anderson/Teague/Villarial/MW but it is unclear and up to stetching and the gods how long this unit will stay intact and back-up development is a big question for us. B. Evans/Price/Parrish/Reed et al. may be an extremely potent crew in this O and Davis/Aiken/Fast Freddy/Nance all will have a fighting chance to replace one of these 4 to make this a really outstanding crew. However, it could end up being Evans plus a bunch of #3 or lower quality WRs and even Evans though I think he will work well is not a sure thing. C. Can WM after being the fastest Bill RB to rush for 2000 yards AND his dismal power outage in the second half of last season not only show his first half form but actually effectively work as a receiver playing the Marshall Faulk role in our O. This could be extremely good with KH or we may hope he nevers plays all season cause JP is clearly improving and has a reasonable chance of ending the year as our likely QB for years. 3. Nall- he is a complete wildcard as he has some good episodes and stats in mop-up work for Favre and sitting and watching this likely HOF QB must have taught him a thing or two. However, GB likely has a need for a starting QB and potentially could have needed one as early as his year and the Pack was not willing to invest in this FA to fill that role and keep him away from the Bills. We'll see which Nall shows up. Its going to be fascinating to watch QB this pre-season.

I'm glad you pointed item 1 out. MM deserved and needed to go as Bills HC, because we needed to completely cut ties with a dysfunctional situation created by Ralph by hiring TD. However, MM shows signs if being a real stand-up guy in many reagards, not the least of them being he walked away from a multi-million dollar remainder of his contract to the Bills by resigning. He is far from perfect and it is not yet proven he is even a consistent winning HC, but I think if he were truly the meathead some try to conveniently label him as being he: 1. simply would have punched the clock here and collected about a milion bucks a year as HC. 2. would not have shown the commitment to a goal and determination he showed by walking a way from a real job to become an assistant coach intern (unpaid initially I think) and worked himself into the lucrative NFL coaching treadmill. 3. would not have stuck with his plans after a lousy start last year which evetually paid off with a huge winning streak and a winning season which just fell short of a playoff berth. I think the dismissal of him as a meathead ignores the fact he was quite successful as an NFL coach as a co-ordinator and then overseeing the O scheme development for the Bills in '04 under TC. They really did a tremendous job reviving the effectiveness of none other than whipping boy Bledsoe after he performed horribly running the intransigent Kevin Killdrive O in 03. I'm glad we have gone to Jauron instead of slogging through another year with MM, but I do not think that trying to summarize his work as being that of a meathead is really all that accurate.

Is current Bills LT back-up Matt Morgan a relative of yours? This would seem to be the only logical explanation for a Bills fan to want Gandy to be gone.

He would get a bad rap last season because folks expected little out of him because his rep was not that of a successful LT and because the Bills struggled so much with their OL play. Given that they were bad in OL performance, it would simply make fiootball sense that part of this outcome should have been the inadequate or bad play of the this "not ready for LT" level player at a position the conventional wisdom says is the most important position on the OL. Yet, his play simply did not fit the expected script accepted by many fan football experts. Given that there were tons of real reasons for the poor OL play (from poor player performance like Anderson and MW to poor scheme and application of scheme by the Bills and Clements) most of the "experts" simply try to ignore Gandy's performance. It simply does not fit the script or was too nuanced to explain in the short form experts use so in general it is ignored or folks make general comments about the need to upgrade at LT without acknowledging thaty this upgrade can occur if Gandy shows the same productivity (or better gosh forbid which ain't supposed to happen) at LT this year. I'm looking forward to how Gandy will do this year. There are lots of reasons to hope that he has finally gotten it, and that the Bills actually have a tremendously cost effective answer at LT. If he and offensive partner Reyes have good chemistry on the left side and Gandy is a year better at LT, these two have the potential to put together a great performance. There are also real reasons why this may not happen (Gandy returns to his normal level of play which is not suited to performance on an island as many LTs deal with or Reyes has issues adjusting to flipping to LG from RG. However, these two outcomes are so widely different and either occurs it will be fairly obvious to even the casual observer, but either is quite possible that the "legends in their own minds" of fan expertise on OL play simply are being pretty quiet with their dulcet predictions of which way its gonna play out.

Not having looked the guy in the eye to see where hid heart is (playing the game or running a business) or having seen him practice to judge how long it will take him to get into game shape, I really find it impossible to say. What, I can say is tha JMac's years of experience and stellar record getting results (a couple of SBs with the Bengals and building the OL for Anderson and Brooks) and also as a teacher (building an OL based on FAs that got the Giants to the SB, and demonstrated good assessment and teaching of Peters and MW), I am willing to put my trust in JMac to make good judgements. As he said, he is not a miracle worker and the sorry choice of Anderson demonstrates he can make mistakes. So even though I do not think I know enough to make an intelligent assesment of Meadows, I think I can make an intelligent assessment to trust JMac to make the right call. My uninformed assessment of the Meadows situation (all us internet posters are entitled to our fact-free opinions) is that it seems like a lot of climbing for him to do to actually beat the challenges of injury, the layoff from the game for two years and the switch to LT necessitated by our resources and needs to make him a worthwhile investment for us. If the market will not give him anything more than back-up money (I think the market will pay him starter money or starter money with very makeable escalators) then I think it would be great for us to sign him to back-up $.

I think we would have an interest just because there are so many questions about our OL. However, the Stinchomb situation would merely add a bunch of additional questions to be answered: 1. Is his shoulder healed such that he can play effectively? 2. Did two years away dull his productivity such he would be problematic to depend on very soon? 3. We have a higher upside prospect in Peters we just extended with big bucks so Stinchomb would come here as a designated back-up at RT and as pointed out woud need to unseat the adequate Gandy at a position he did not play before at LT, there are already questions about how he will work at RT so the jump to the other side is yet aother hurdle with uncertainty. In essence, the market will probably give him more money to sign than we would want to pay to merely have these questions answered. So I doubt we would want to put cash behind any interest in him.

The really good news for us about the signing of Simpson and Williams (and particularly Simpsons's agent sending out the word that his client said just git 'er done is that far most signs do point to the Bills draftees showing the "footbsll " character that marv has said he is going to be looking for from his players. The deal is not done yet as 1st round draftee will have to get 'er done in short order (I suspect this will happen as he is slotted for more $ at #8 than even he by his own admission expected to get) and there is still the low-character hit that draftee Butler made as a collegian (he has been punished for it and should be ready to move past this trasgression so though he is on a short leash with the public that saw the prominent replay, as long as their are no additional trangressions on his part this should also be fine and dandy. Folks are right that Bush has the talent which allows him to take the legit business route of using his leverage to maximize his dollars. However, it is situations like this that remind me that despite my psychotic devotion to stats and on field footbsll stuff, ultimately this is entertainment for me and I much prefer rooting for players who say the right things about the game meaning more to them than money, even if in most cases they really do not mean it.

I agree that if Ko Simpson is a better player than TV then Ko Simpson should start. However, if folks have never heard about older players teaching younger players about things from the details of playing the game to the broader issues of handling yourself as a pro and supporting upur teammates then folks have not been listening very hard. From stories like when Milloy first came to this team and basically called his teammates out at one of this first team gatherings when the boys laughed and made fun of a fellow player when he got bowled over on film and Milloy was pretty pissed about making the point that such displays were one of the things which made unsuccessful teams different from the support which the Pats showed each other that made them a TEAM capable of winning an SB. Players were chastened and it was noted that their was a apa;pab;e difference in attitude that led to our Bills simply beating the crap out of a much better Pats' team 31-0 in the opener. For those who think the game is all about physical ability and how fast does someone run a 40, simply note that the Pats team at that point was in disarray over Belichek completely screwing up the Milloy negotiations. The gut check came when Colvin and a few other supposed central guys to their getting Ws went down and this team faced a gut check and had the internal leadership (One of BB's key contibutions was he seemed to gave them all something in common to hate) to act like professionals and back each other up. Good vets teach rooks these lessons. Brady also talks about and seems to be sincere and truthful about it what a help it was for him as a young QB to have fellow player Bledsoe to talk with about Ds and how to lead the team. Bledsoe often had brain farts when he had to make a quick decision or improvise, but he could give Brady a perspective as a fellow player and communicate things with him in a way a coach could not. Also on the QB front, one of the main problems with Flutie which made him not the player to be the #1 for a youngster like RJ and which was an issue for him with SB was wether he was going to relate to Brees as a competitor or as a student. TV is clearly on borrowed time due to his age and he is likely to be all about passing things on to up and comers like Simpson. The focus of some that TV never was a safety or never played Cover 2 seems somewhat limited and even misguided about what is going on here. One of our main concerns about TV is that he is so old that he may hit some physical wall. However one thing that comes along with that age is he has seen a ton of plays and formation from a DBs point of view. The safety role in the Cover or Tampa 2 is all about playing centerfield and making reads. The notion that TV knows nothing about the safety role because he was a CB simply igmores the fact that if one is playing any position effectively then you had better know exactly what your fellow teammates are supposed to do and where they are supposed to be. Over the years. TV was required generally to cover the best WR of the other team, but in any game when the situation called for it, the coverage scheme was a zone rather than a man to man. The notion that TV or any multi-teim Pro Bowler who played CB does not know what a safety is supposed to do and how zone coverages work is simply wrong. Tje coaching staff does have the primary teaching duty, but believe me there are weaknesses or problems that any employee has which it is great to get the bosses help, there are simply weaknesses or problems one needs to be very careful about how you make the boss aware of them or bring them up at all. This is one of the advantages of having a fellow player who has been around whom you can talk to and get pointers from as to how pros deal with these plays and schemes. Finally, I agree that when one is investing your own money getting rich slowly and building things to last is by far the best way to deal with building assets. However, the situation if you are Ralph, Marv or Jauron is a different market situation. Rather than thinking about the future or the long-term, they are running a business and selling tickets now. As Marv said in his book, coaches who build for a future payoff are simply building for the next coach. Particularly after 6 years of no playoffs, the timescale of the Golden Boys who have no control over when the Grim Reaper will come is to win and win now. My sense is that if they have any belief at all that the guy who led the team in combined INTs and FRs can repeat or come close to doing this in 06 or instead they can give the player they environ as their future FS getting valuable time to make mistakes and learn, their choice is gonna be to go with the team leader in these categories and look to have the youngster learn by watching rather than learn by doing. I think folks who are looking to produce a winner next year or the year after simply have different goals than Ralph, Marv and Jauron.

WHY? The most important thing is obviously on-field production and if Kos Simpson produces better he should play, but even if he is gonna be great, it is generally quite the accomplishment for a second day draftee to simply be a contributor to the team by the end of his first year. Expecting him to start at all his first year is asking a lot of a player and asking him to start immediately puts the rookied on the same development track we used with first day pick Coy Wire, From the highlights I have seen Simpson looks like a far smarter player than Wire, but having him start before he is ready to perform is actually a good way to retard his growth. Beyond rushing Sinpson being potentially bad for his development, TV has several real world positives to provide to this team: 1. He led the team in terms of combined turnovers last year tieing for the team lead in INTs with McGee and with several players in fumbles recovered. As a Bill fan I want him and all players who start to perform even better than they did last year. Don't you? 2. The switcch to the Cover 2 from the zone blitz moves his duty away from the primary complaints folks had about TV tackling and toward his strength of pass coverage and using the many plays he has seen over many years to diagnose plays. 3. Our young DBs from fellow starter Whitner, to Yobouty who all analysis point to him needing another year of CB schooling and Simpson himself stand to profit a great deal from having TV download his experiences and perspective gained in years of play to these youngsters. The thought that he should be cut seems even more negative toward the Bills as: 1. I hope Simpson steps up and plays well and commands a starting role, but if so TV can play the same peer teaching role as a back-up so why on earth cut him. 2. There is little cash advantage cap wise for cutting TV. 3. If your anti-TV feelings are prompted by his getting the respect from his fellow players of being voted NFLPA President, one hopes the Bills do not act or operate in the same way. If the word were to spread among players that TV got cut when he could contribute to Ws due to his union activity, the retribution by the players on through free coukd be severe. The Bills need to keep their union feelings and their football activities in differet places. If we use the game for retribution against NFLPA leadershp it will only hurt the Bills on the field to mix these two areas,

I do not think thst folks are now realizing things were different than they thought they were. but simply have had the additional time to sort it out and pick their targets and now will use the leverage point built into the deal to try to get a better deal for themselves. The real deal is that the circumstances are exactly the same now as they were before. The players have the leverage to assert and obtain a majority of the total revenues and of the owners cannot deal with this, they can take their ball and go home, but the players will have a tough but reasonable chance of building a new version of pro football using the template of the reconfigured NFL. After the replacement player lockout of the mid 80s, the NFLPA was beaten so badly that they were more open to and left the options of continuing a system which gave a lionshare of the profits to the team owners OR they could threaten to decertify and by forcing the owners to bid for players in a truer free market essentially take their ball and go home. Rather than compete in a free market for player services, the team owners blinked and agreed to a CBA that established a partnership with the players within which they restrained free trade through policies such as the draft, barring access to the market for people below college graduation age, and a a variety of personal controls on controlled substances and observance of NFL rules like TD celebrations and clothing styles. The CBA development progressed from its initial deal where the workers recieved a % of the designated gross receipts which guaranteed stability of a product which could be sold to the TV networks and provide the workers with far more $ than they achieved prior to the decertification threat. Though by agreeing to split only a designated rather than a total gross, the team owners were still the majority partners, but the amount recieved by % of that designated gross exceeded the 52% number which led to the lockout and because of the greater wealth generated by the NFL led to much higher payments to the workers. The dynamic remains the same and finally under the new CBA with NFLP recieving 59.5% of the total revenue they are clearly the majority partners. However, it is a partnership and though within the rough and tumble modern world of talk radio histrionics and an increased in rudeness embodies in shows such as Jerry Springer, this is quite likely a negotiating tactic which the NFLPA can give significant $ to the team owners under the threat of reopening the deal and still clearly be the majority partners. Look for ongoing negotiations between the NFL and NFLPA over the CBA to issue a set of clarifiers which will deliver more largesse to the owners, but look for the small market teams to command the lionshare of that largesse.

Alright I give. You win.

This judgment is harsh and certainly does not line up with real events. In his time since he arrived for the 2004 season, the OL saw improvement in the OL he inherited from horrendous to adequate and saw it drop back last year from adequate to really bad. At worst, this coach coach needs at least the 3 years accorded a draftee befpre one declares him a bust. In his case, given the long history of Bills failure to develop the OL going back to the days of Kent Hull, you gotta take into account the situation he inherited and the situation abovr him where TD proved to be dysfunctional before one simply declares him a bust. There is no free pass for him as he gets the big bucks to deal whatever situation confronts him. He may not be the right guy for the job if the job requires someone to deal with a horrid pass and a changing framework (I'm not sure who can actually do well in such a situtation). However. the judgment you make simply does not accord with the facts. I think these are the notable items of his two seasons here: 1. Its hard to go too far in describing how bad the situation on the OL he inherited was. Some may choose to forget the putrid offensive performance of 2003 when folks developed the patpatpatsack name to describe Bledsoe, but the OL while receiving episodes of huge attention (a #4 spent on MW and a first day pick spent on JJ and an FA acquisition of an out of place player to play C) these were only episodes and the OL had never shown signs of a strategy or consistent development since the Kent Hull days. To make matters worse, one of the huge faux pas of the GW "error" was that he hired his buddy Vinky to be OL coach though he had not experience at the position. Forced to move him out as he showed little strategic vision within the context of the GW Noffense and less ability to teach more than the fundamentals to the rookies, GW replaced him with the virtually equally inexperienced Pat Ruel. Finf fault if one wants with JMac, but to assess him as having sucked since he got here with only a mention of his ability to work with crud does not give true justice or accuracy to the level of crud he walked into. Any expectation that with two years he is going to reverse a horrible situation almost 10 years in the making is simply unreasonable. 2. JMac himself hinted strongly at the standard of performance needed to accurate assess him by declaring a few times that he was not a miracle worker. This really implied without making a Hobert like admission of how bad it was that quite frankly folks who judged that within a year or two of being here he was going to take a bunch of crud players and get something beynd adequacy out of them simply is living in a fantasy world. The sense that getting good play out of the OL would be the equivalent of turning water into win really states how bad it was. 3. His 2004 actually saw some near miraculous work out of him. He literally was hired into a situation where MW hasd been given excused absences from voluntary camp cause the Grammy who raised him had died. He did a great job as best as I can tell from the outside of using a combination of sticks (threatening publicly to move MW to G and thus denying him a big payday as an FA LT even if he turned his game around) and carrots (giving him a gameball when he did work himself back into shape to play and be judged by many outsiders as the best performing Bills OL player in 2004) to momentarily revive him from being a bust. This momentary revival of some performance by the judgment of outside observers of eventual bust MW whom he had nothing to do with selecting was not only evidence of solid work on his part but spoke to how bad the OL was if MW was the best among the bust MW, the oft-injured JJ, the overmatched Teague and the needed to be cut Pacillo he inherited as the 2004 crew he was working with. The fact none of these men are Bills today speaks to the level of crud he inherited and you want to blame him for this. What do think he should have produced with them and was getting rid of them not the best thing he could do in reality. The only argument about this personnel one could make would be to claim he should have resigned JJ early and paid him a ton even though he never started all 16 for the Bills at LT, ended up missing important parts of a quarter of the games he played for us in 2004 and after the market gave him a huge contract to move to SF he ended up on the IR for most of the 2005 season. 4. The 2004 team got off to a rocky start as he dealt with the crud, but actually the Bills overall produced a winning season and overall one has to note that the OL did see a drastic reduction in the number of sacks of patpat Bledsoe and did in fact see WM produce 1200 yards in roughly 9 starts. I think this is on the face of it closer to the miracle he said would not happen than the average performance you grudgingly seem willing to give him credit for. 5. He deserves kudos for specific work such as: A. Dealing with our complete meltdown at LG, by somehow identifying and training Lawrence Smith off the Ravens PS to start there. Smith proved not to be adequate enough to start at LG, but quite frankly getting a player off of another team's PS to even be a reasonable back-up would have been good work. JMac got limited but quality starts out of Smith and as this was a part of his dealing with the Pacillo meltdown was not bad work on his part. B. Rather than stick with the inadequate but better Smith at LT, JMac led the charge in orchestrating a shift of the little used Bannan from DT to LG in redzone situations. This switch coincided with an increase in redzone production with the objective measure of more scores. In fact, this move became a hallmark of the Bills as folks like DT Adams were given a shot at offensive work and produced in the redzone. C. He did finally oversee plugging Tucker in at LG and this shift coincided with the 6 game win streak which brought us within the shot at making the playoffs that year. D. He became a vocal advocate of moving Peters from TE and ST to RT a position at which he recently signed a long-term deal with the Bills. 6. He ain't perfect though and deserves brickbats for signing the failed Bennie Anderson as our LT last year. While he did the best he could do with Teague, JJ and the MW situation he inherited, the Anderson debacle is all on him as it happened on his watch. he seemed to be fooled by the good luck he had getting Lawrence Smith to be an inadequate player but still an upgrade for us over Pacillo/Sullivan off the Ravens PS. Perhaps he assumed he could do even better working with a Rvens starter, but he was a bust. 7. These are the yet to be seen issues for him which are too early to judge: A. Reyes is a seeming clear upgrade over the failed Anderson. The JMac MO seems to be to get cost effective and still effective players that other teams choose not to resign because they have a better player or prospect on hand. It would seem to be a football mistake to merely judge Reyes as a castoff unable to play NFL starter quality ball. The Carolina OL was productive with him at RG last year. The good news is that he appears to have not been resigned because the market was going to give him starters money and the Panthers were ready to go with the highly touted Mathis at RG last year. They did not because of Reyes good quality play and because of the team's success led them not to want to rock a working boat. There are questions which remain as to how much demand their was for Reyes so did other professionals make the same judgment JMac did and also whether him lining up previiously in episodes at LG will be enough to allow him to be as productive for us there as he was last year at RG for Carolina. In any case this is a clear upgrade over Anderson and we hope for the best. B. Fowler at C looks like the same MO as the acquisition of Reyes. Fowler was a goner with the Vikes as soon as he signed as they clearly were looking for a one year fill-in for multitime Pro Bowler Matt Birk who went on IR last year. Yet, he was simply productive in the real world as the Vikes first wanted to try longtime Vike Cory Withrow at C and Fowler beat him out about 3 games into the season. Fowler's play coincided with some improved production by Culpepper and the Vikes O which coincided with Fowler's starts. Even better, the combination of Fowler and Brad Johnson at QB coincided with a lengthy win streak which got them close to the playoffs. Like the LG/RG issue with Reyes some outstanding question remain with Fowler. 1. Is he gonna be the Fowler whose play coincided with Vikes wins last year and some good play at Cleveland as a youngster, or will it be defined by the injuries which cost him the end of last season and a game here or there in his career. 2. Was the market not being interested in risking big bucks on him as an FA and leading to Cleve drafting a highly touted C when he was on the roster a sign of some problems or a mistake on their part. We'll see. C. Villarial acquisition as an RG for us was not an unreasonble move as we desperately needed a little experience on this team which saw the loss of perennial Pro Bowler Ruben Brown early under JMac. Villarial like the aging Briwn has been solid but not spectacular for us. The same age demographic which gives him value with a young line also has seen what used to be nicks he could play through become injuries for him and it is questionalbe whether he will last all or much of the season. Potential kudos to JMac in that in addition to Peters, his best acquisition seems to have been early second day draft pick Preston who was a spot starter last year and seems to be poised to step in for Villarial or for Fowler if he dusappoints. The jury is is still out on this prospect. We'll see. Overall, I think a rational judgment about JMac can come this year looking at several situations. 1. Can he produce solid back-ups from low round pickss under his watch like Geisinger and Pennington. 2. Will he be able to revive the career of well-regarded failure Aaron Gibvon. 3. What will he find among rejects like Word or Moran, simply having them become the new Greg Jerman's would be fine if our starters were solid but they are not and we need a miracle here. 4. Will Butler be the Bills foolishly not following their own character dictum after they drafted a player who made a vicious in-game hit on a fellow opponent who was unawate and vulnerable to injury or instead did this hit cause folks to not draft a player with the talent to be taken on the first day of the draft. JMac has overseen the development of an OL capable of making an SB with an NYG team which made the big game in 2000 with new players at 4 of 5 OL spots led by FA acquistions former Bills Glenn Parker and Dusty Ziegler. This recen performance was a fair bit above average and coupled with his lengthy career and good results leading to two separate Bengals SB appearances, he clearly deserves a reasonable chance at production. For us to call for his head merely because he blew it with the choice of Bennie Anderson which was a clear mistake on his part would be a act on our part which might define why we have had so many problems over the years.

QB Preview There will be a sharp competitionfor the Bills starting QB job this year between last year's starter Kelly Holcomb, JP Losman and Craig Nall, This competition in pre-season camp represents a stark departure from past Bills' habits as the plan is to decide this competition based on performance on the field rather than a QB being chosen by the front office based on their assessment of who gas the best resume or whom they like the most. This past practice has led to a series of miscalculations and wishful thinking beginning with owner Ralph Wilson making a handshake deal to reward Kelly in his next big buck contract in the next season, only to find it was wishful thinking and a gross miscalculation to not see that Kelly would be forced to retire as age had taken away any mobility left in his battered body. A series of front office miscalculations at QB followed such as: 1. Having to take Todd Collins with their 2nd pick in 1995 as it became clear they should have drafted a replacement for Kelly a year or two earlier so they had to spend high at QB in the hopes the player would quickly develop. 2. Then rushing Collins into the starting line-up when it quickly became clear he needed to have a case of happy-feet trained out of him (if it ever could be), 3. The front office reacted to these two errors by then trading a 3rd for Billy Jow Hobert only to find we he unprofessionally did not even study the playbook in a week he did bit exoect to play but was forced to by injury. He then even more stupidly volunteered this information and was summarily cut. 4. Panic does sometimes breed great choices out of desperation and the Bills did this by attracting Doug Flutie from the CFL. However, the panic also caused them to renege on a promise to Flutie that he would get a shot in camp to start, but the front office instead chose Rob Johnson as the next Jim Kelly and gave him the starting job and a huge bonus with no on-field competition. 5. Bills fans were not condemned to complete non winning seasons in the 10 years post Jimbo as Flutie led the team to the playoffs when fate gave hin a chance and the front office decisions to go with Bledsoe produced a dramatic turnaround with him as QB and also a winning record in his last season as QB, These on field event cannot be denied even though those who hate these two players may want to do so. However, the front office once again made a decision to hand the starting job to Losman last season though eveh he said it was not the way to win the job. The key to things this year is that the word is it does not matter what anyone thinks as on field performance is going to trump these declarations, by th media, by fans, and even by the owner if fellow Golden Boy Marv Levy has his way. In terms of who this will be. Predictions are more simply guesses than based on real information as there is not even a Bills O scheme anyone has seen yet to make judgments about whose talents will make this scheme work. To make the variables even more difficult to predict, though the strengths and weakenesses of Holcomb are well known after 10 years and the speed with which Losman will develop is also an unknown but his strengths and weaknesses are apparent. However, though we know Craug Nall is highly regarded by the Bills braintrust as they went and got him, he really is a wildcard in terms of how he will play as a starting QB as he has been sitting on the bench behind Favre for a few years. The fact that the Pack looked elsewhere for their next QB in drafting Rodgers and then letting Nall go does not bode well as an assessment by those who knew him best. Yet, even though predictions are little more than fact-free opinions right now, it is more than allowed and in fact heartily desired by the NFL for fans to have their favorites. My cut on them is this: #1 on Bills QB depth chart is Kelly Holcomb. Even though this is likely Losman's jpb to lose because of the Bills big investment in $ for him (also an expenditure of draft picks to move up and get him in the 1st in 2004- however, this draft expenditure was actually a very reasonable move and ultimately a small cost as it wa clear that Bledsoe's days as a Bills QB were numbered after his horrendous 2003 play. It was reasonable in that the QB class of 2005 simply sucked and if Losman had stayed in the Bills likely would have spent a 1st to get him anyway and instead they got a chance to give him valuable training in mop-up time. As the draft is pretty much a crap shoot anyway, fans bouyed by fantasy league info place far too much importance on the draft as a team building tool. it is a valuable tool, but pretty far from being the only tool or even the main one available for buiding a winner. The picks traded to step up and draft Losman is a fairly small price to pay if he work out)-. At any rate, if Fairchild's plans to install something like the high-flying St. Louis work, then actually Holcomb's skill set will probably make this scheme work best. The St. Louis passing attack produces a ton of big plays, but actually rather than the aging arm of a QB like Mark Bulger throwing a bunch of long TDs, this offense actually depended upon players like Issac Bruce, Torry Holt and most of all the out for the season (and likely his career) Marshall Faulk to catch short passes and run after the catch for big yards. The Bills have signed and developed a bunch of fleet receivers and RAC specialist Josh Reed to play, if the scheme works as advertised and Fairchild designs plays which get quick separtation through the WRs speed, through picking on zones or good use of picks, then the good judgment developed by Golcomb over 10 years will allow him to do very well. A big key though will not so much be Holcomb's skills (over 10 years he has never been consistent enough to be a quality NFL starter) but the level of OL improvement and the role it plays in helping McGahee run the ball. If they are effective it will really liberate Holcomb to be all he can be even if that is only episodically great and mostly adequate as he has been in the past. In addition McGahee will need to step up his game to demonstrate that he can play the Marchall Faulk pass catching role in this offense. It is quite doubtful he will equal the pass productivity of Faulk, but even showing signs of this will be enough and make Holcomb or any QBs job much easier. Despite the KH position on the depth chart and the possibilities with him, Losman is the favorite to win the starting nod. He simply sucked last season when handed the starting job, however, the Bills have a ton of cap room invested in him and he had clear talent which made him a reasonable 1st round pick and likely better thought of than the QBs who were ultimately drafter in 2005 which would have been his class if he had hung around college. A better OL is not as much a necessity for him as it is for Holcomb because JP showed tremedous scrambling ability running for his life and still being productive behind a porous Tulane OL.However, better OL performance by the Bills may give him the confidence to slow down a little bit and make better choices rather than looking to run too quickly. As with most vets, the game should slow down a bit for him. In addition he has characterized his development last as coddling him too much and its nice to see him demanding more challenges from the braintrust this year (his mistakes will be challenged vigorously even without the invitation by Bills fans and the media do its nice he says bring it on, one simply hopes he responds better to it than he did last year). Though it is not a majority chance he will be an adequate stating QB this year, his prospects are better than Holcombs. Nall is essentially a wildcard. He did well mopping up for Favre, but starting and relieving are two different things. By definition the game was over one way or the other when he came in and its far better that he was successful in this outings than if he failed, but there is essentially no guarantee or even much off a good chance the he will be an adequate starting QB this year.. Nevertheless, the key for the Bills is that een if there is only a 3 or 4 chances our of 10 JP will be adequate, a 2 or 3 chances out of 10 that KH will be adequate and 1 or 2 chances out of 10 that Nall will be adequate, if the Blls coaches are efficient about choosing quicky (at latest after the 2nd pre-season game) then they can reduce the failed chances these QBs need from the limited practice and game time the Bills have to allocate to finding a starting QB. If they are efficient, then though there is no majority chance for any individual QB, there will be a majority chance they will find someone to be an adequate starter from amongst these three. PREDICTION: JP Losman

Hy sense is the quality of the QB play obviously can help everyone play better. Manning's quick release and good judgment is part of the effectiveness of the OL and when the O is on the field, the D is off which helps them. However, unless we are talking about dominant QB play which we are not, i think the QB's play is really a tertiary factor for this team behind Jauron/Fewell getting good performance out of our underweight DTs and the players JMac has acquired actually proving to be better OL players than last year's starters (and getting lucky and not getting hurt so we do not have to depend on the complete wildcard we have of back-up OL talent) which will make the big difference in our W/L this season. As long as Marv/Jauron/Fairchild are efficient about not wasting a bunch of practice and game time on our 3rd QB after 2 pre-season games, I think the odds are actually in our favor that we will get adequate QB play this year. I do not think there is a majority chance any one of these particular players (JP. KH.Nall) will prove to be adequate, but I do think in the majority of cases if the braintrust is efficient about not wasting development time on the disaster QB, that one of these three will prove to be adequate. If the OL is cooking and the D is up to snuff, then we can even compete for a wildcard with this adequate QB play (this of course assumes that the ST remains as productive as it has the last two seasons.

It looks like the Bills DID in fact feel like they got both aspects. I think most folks have to admit in this crapshoot called the draft they may well be right. It seems clear they had Whitner rated above Huff at safety and while overall most folks would agree that Davis, Hawk or D'Brick were better players it looks doubtful that folks take after Whitner and prior to the #18 pick where some had him ranked are clearly better players. I think the major factor in any BAP consideration is that the Bills do want to do both as the Bills being a business does not allow them to simply ignore their needs. They had a clear need caused by the cuts of Milloy and Adams to get a DT and SS in this draft they thought would contribute immediately. However, taking BAP into account, they should strongly consider taking the BAP even if he does not play these two positions. If Davis or Hawk were available there is a pretty good BAP case for taking them. However, which of the players taken from #9-20 or so would you say is the BAP they should have selected instead? I think there is no one on the draft board who is worth a #8 without the added supplement to their case of us having a need. Its interesting that many folks who argue that we woulds/shoulda/coulda picled a BAP instead of Whitner actually also argue we should have built the OL. This thought is based on their peception of NEED as best as I can tell.

Good post with well thought out points. Thanks. The questions it engenders for me are: 1. Definitely from the data you provide it seems clear to me that the Bills 9 victories came against their lesser opponents and their losses came against their better opponents. However is this the same thing as having a soft schedule? I think not. It strikes me as being a case where the 04 Bills were a middlin team who generally lost to the better teams they faced (mostly not by a lot as the game in NE was the only one they loss by more than two scores) but generally tatooed their weaker opponents. Close generally only counts in horseshoes, dancing, and hand greanades so I agree with you that the scores of games make little difference in terms of results. However, another place it becomes a consideration is when trying to make intelligent analysis. I don't think you help your points much at all by simply being dismissive of this factor. I think the Bills were about an average team that year (most teams were and Pete Rozelle is smiling somewhere). However, it seems clear to me that once the team got its act together it was it the upper half of the average teams though ultimately not an above average or special team that can win the big one. 2. How "soft" was the schedule compared to the rest of the NFL? This point interest me a lot because I think the double edged sword of the Rozelle inspired parity is that it has made the NFL more entertaining as any team can win any Sunday. However, on the other side of things I think that mediocrity has really been an element of almost all teams in the league. Basing your analysis in draft order takes this consideration out of play for the most part as in the draft order ranking some teams are definitely worse. However, if one goes into the more anecdotal analysis which you do bringing up issues like home openers and playing back-ups, looking at the whole NFL, it really seems thar mediocrity is the order of the day. 3. I think your final point about anyway you slice it is simply not correct. If you slice it the legit way you do then I think it was easy (though I think actually even the case you make is more one describing a bifurcated schedule where we loss to the good team and beat the bad teams- and i think trying to better understand what this means gets you into the margin of victory discussion). However, if one slices it based on a comparison of the relative strength of the '04 opponent versus the relative strength of the 05 opponents and specifically base this on facing teams which made the playoffs or not, there is not a big difference in the ease of the schedule between the two years. Further, when one does factor in the issues you dismiss such as margin of victory and homefield advantage during the winning streak then this Bills teams faced a chunk of opponents who did well in the NFL that year and whom the Bills manhandled. The item which prompted this consideration was the claim that our better D performance in 04 versus D performance in 05 was to some extent based on us facing an easier schedule in 04. I think when one slices it this way the concept that this was an easier schedule than the norm does not seem correct.

The thing which concerns me about Posey was that there were several plays I remember wherePosey seemed to come oh so close to getting to the passer but not get there. These anecdotes may mean nothing as who knows what the D responsibilities were and it may be more of a positive here that Posey pressured the passer than it is a negative that he did not get there. In fact, as we switch to a Tampa 2 rather than a zone blitz, QB pressures will be as much the mark of success of the DL doing its jobs as sacks are in the zone blitz. The safties will need to make good reads to take advantage of this or the pressure will be for naught, but in essence there appear to be 3 layers of pass coverage (QB pressure or a potential sack, CBs or LBs reading pass doing tight coverage on the reciever, the safties and the MLB reading this pressure to come in and break up or pick-off the pass. Posey has shown good skills in the zone blitz of 03 and 04 as he made very productive reads and judgments as to whether he should pinch up to stop the run or drop back to pass cover. However, as things fell apart it was hard to tell what the heck he and othe defenders were trying to do because it did not work out well at all. I like Posey being a contributor this D as one of the big jobs of the LBs will be to read run/pass and determine whether they should be pinching in to fill in for DTs who are told to shoot the gap, or to drop back in oass coverage. However, if his continual coming up short that I noticed was a sign that age has slowed him down to much it will not matter how good his reads are. As far the article, the opinions sound logical. However, the big deal is we have little clear idea how the Cover 2 Jauron has announced publicly is going to be run. The good news is that under TD starters seemed to be chosen in the front office based on their "superior" football wisdom and under the new regime a lot of this wisdom will be decided by who does the job in pre-season. We'll see.

There's little question to me that if I was in the Bills situation in real life where I am running a business that is a football team and I have a need to fill starting SS and DT slots or my team has no shot whatsoever at putting a reasonable product on the field in 2006, I prefer having the 1st rounder to having the two later picks. I'm assuming that I have made a judgement that the top 3 DTs on the board are Ngata, Bunkley and McCargo (not necessarily in that order but the fact they are the top 3 and I judge no one else as having much potential at all to be a contributor at DT quickly to my team in 06 is the key). I also assume that I have made a judgement that not only are there only 2 SS with a reasonable chance at contributing immediatelt (Whitmer and Huff and again it does not matter for this consideration what order you have these two the key is that Allen is recovering from injury and 4th safety taken Bullocks I do not see as a contributpr immediately). If this is your judgment (which appears the Bills and the consensus generally have made) then my course is clear, I'm pretty sure the pool of likely first year contributors (and it is to be hoped they will be immediate starters) will be gone likely in the 1st and certainly before my 2nd pick. I see the key for me is to gain an additional pick in the 1st round. If I am lucky, when my pick rolls around at #8, no one has been taken at these two positions and I then try to trade down the #8 and move my second pick into the 1st round. The Bills did not get lucky as OAK snatched Huff at #7. I now have to decide how risk averse I am because the worse case for me is now someone snatches Whitmer if I trade down the #8 to get a pick in #10-20 but move my 2nd pick up into the 1stmove into the 1st round to balance the exchange (assuming I can find the partner (s) necessary to do all this). In real life, I actually have Whitmer rated as high as or higher than Huff and particularly since #9 DET was said to be interested in Huff, I almost certainly pick Whitmer now at #8. Since my hope of being in a position to make deals to move down from #8 and still get my second into the first so i can get both the DT and SS I need to compete and run my business in 06, I now need to bite the bullet and pick Whitmer and trade one of my 3rds to move up into the 1st and get one of the three DTs who can contribute in 06. That's what I do. I feel bad that it did not work out so I could get what I needed and then some, but I am pretty pleased with this draft as I used my extra 3rd to get both the SS and the DT I wanted whom I feel can contribute quickly. I would agree with you that I'd prefer more picks rather than one higher pick if I was not running a business that needs to put butts in the seats this year. We;ve gone 6 years with no playoffs and I owe it to my fans to compete next year as best I can. We wasted our time on the 3 year plans which are logical for building a winner during the TD regime. Reality forces me no question about it to try to compete for the long-term while maintaining a winner as best I can. I cannot have the luxury of another 3-13 season, even if that is the intelligent way to buil for the long term.