Lothar

just responding to your assumption that Houston is new - they have a pretty storied history. It's like saying Cleveland's a young franchise.

ummm ... Oilers?

No worries - good find.

Based on all the ongoing discussions about the draft, I thought this was an interesting article. It discusses value of 1st round picks by position. Also, the idea that the further a position is from the ball, the easier it is to adjust to the NFL. While I don't condone copying articles in their entirety, I'm less conflicted at pointing to someone who did so at the BB message board. espn insider info on BB message board

The 2 most interesting comments - despite the alarmist headline ... I don't think Detroit's a threat since we're talking multiple trades (and 20 obviously won't cut it to get Willis): Jeff: How many spots are the Lions looking to move down, ideally? Is it down to 5-7 for Adams or back a little further for Willis? Tom Kowalski: I think the Lions would prefer to move down no further than No. 6. The consensus is that there are six elite players in the draft and then, after that, it's a pool of really good players. I believe the Lions are hoping Willis slides down the board and I think there's a chance it might happen. Not because of his ability, but because he's a middle linebacker and some teams don't even have that position while other teams have greater needs. The Lions are hoping to jump back up into the first round (after a potential trade down) and grab him about No. 20. It's a longshot, but they don't have a lot of options. Mike: When dungy took over tampa they went 6-10, the next year they were 10-6... when lovie took over the bears 5-11 to 11-5... even when dungy took over the 6-10 colts they went 10-6 the next year... now i know the Lions aren't going to go 13-3, but how much do these turn arounds display the importance of understanding the 'tampa-2' and how far along do you think the lions players are... what are the chances of the Lions following suit in the 'tampa-two turnaround' Tom Kowalski: It was interesting to talk to Brian Urlacher the last couple of years because he said they were basically clueless about the defense in the first year and made huge strides in the second year. He also said it takes three years for the players to really "know'' the defense and have it become second nature. But he did say the biggest leap is from the first year to the second. We'll see if the Lions can pull it off.

I meant Patrick Willis the linebacker. I see Willis more like Bennett and Poz more like Conlan - both good, but Patrick seems more explosive.

yay, it must be cold in Hades today ... we're using Pffffttt to mke us feel better about our team. That site, which most of us bash mercilessly for their rumor mongering and inane analysis, now becomes the bastion of impartiality. Having PFT think we may be competitive is NOT a reason for me to feel better about my team. Count me crazy but I'll wait and see how Fewell adjusts to life without Clements and whether McNally really knows how to turn Langston Walker from a turnstile into a solid right tackle and if we can draft a difference maker like Willis and if we can trade no more than a 2nd for Turner. Lots of questions ahead that need answers before I drink the Koolaid.

If we aren't the most sensitive fans in the country, I don't know who is. Look, we've sucked for a decade - we've floundered with GMs, coaches and QBs. It seems we are on the right track but if this coaching staff isn't as good as I'm giving them credit for, we could easily spiral to a 4 or 5 win season. I'm seeing lots of love for the Sabres everywhere. That's what happens when we win. Does that give them an unfair advantage in free agency? Hey that comes with the territiry.

I see this claim being batted around the Chargers' boards and I really think people don't understand the whole compensation issue. I wish you no malice but it's no guarantee he'll fetch a 3rd rounder - and that pick won't be available till '09. Going by some simple draft chart assumptions, a 3rd rounder in '09 is equivalent to something like a 5th rounder this year. And that's if you get a 3rd rounder - more likely unless he goes to a team with a great OL and has a spectacular season, you'll be lucky to pull off a 4th ... in '09. People here think he's worth no more than McGahee, folks on that board think he's better than Alexander and Edgerrin. We want to give up a 3rd, you guys expect more than a 1st. Realistically, if this trade does happen, it wont be for more than a 2nd rounder this year ... maybe you'll get a 3rd rounder next year if a team gets desperate. Not that I'd advocate his selection at 12 but the difference in projected salaries between Lynch and Turner way more than offset the latter's experience running behind a great line. Anything more than that and I'd rather take my chances with a draftee sometime in the first day.

check this one out: I really could see the Bills offering their #12 straight up for Turner. Losman started to come around last year, Lee Evans is a stud, & they took steps to improve their O-line this off-season. Peterson will be gone before they'd pick at 12, & Turner is a much better option than Lynch. Adding Turner with their 12th pick would be a GREAT move for the Bills. Question is, if they make that offer, can AJ get the Titans (or someone else) to offer something better? uhh ok

that's classic I vote "starship trooper, 2nd class"

is that IMAO or LMAO?

PFW = Pro Football Weekly, PFT = Pfffffffft very different, one's reputable, the other's just pffffftt

I think Dean's just blowing smoke up Holcomb's - ask him about Bob Dobbs though ... he gets deadly serious.

Interesting hypothesis. I think this possibility holds more credence if we select Brian Leonard in the 2nd. Assuming we go LB in the 1st, we may have a shot at him in the 2nd - I can't think of a better fit as a 3rd down receiver and ultimate team guy after reading about how he nearly single-handedly brought Rutgers back to life - go watch his highlights on the yahoo nfl draft site - his balance and ability to hurdle tacklers is pretty jaw-dropping for a 230 pound fullback who has maybe the best hands of ANY player coming out. If we do go the Leonard route, then I can see us going after a Shaud Williams-like shifty, quick alternative with a 2nd day pick. Some of this may depend on whether we take Willis or not. If we don't get him, I can see us taking a couple LBs instead - including small school prospect Justin Durant. I do think that our tactic will be going after numbers if we don't get a premier pick at the RB or LB positions.

actually, did a quick search for early line and found us in the bottom 3rd as far as Super Bowl prospects - probably reasonable at this point in the offseason considering the hits we've taken: early line on SB odds Odds to win the 2008 Super Bowl XLII Odds All wagers have action. No Parlays. Max $600 Arizona Cardinals 35/1 Atlanta Falcons 50/1 Baltimore Ravens 15/1 Buffalo Bills 50/1 Carolina Panthers 20/1 Chicago Bears 10/1 Cincinnati Bengals 15/1 Cleveland Browns 100/1 Dallas Cowboys 15/1 Denver Broncos 15/1 Detroit Lions 100/1 Green Bay Packers 50/1 Houston Texans 100/1 Indianapolis Colts 8/1 Jacksonville Jaguars 30/1 Kansas City Chiefs 30/1 Miami Dolphins 40/1 Minnesota Vikings 70/1 New England Patriots 3/1 New Orleans Saints 19/1 New York Giants 20/1 New York Jets 30/1 Oakland Raiders 80/1 Philadelphia Eagles 18/1 Pittsburgh Steelers 18/1 San Diego Chargers 6/1 San Francisco 49ers 45/1 Seattle Seahawks 12/1 St.Louis Rams 55/1 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 70/1 Tennessee Titans 38/1 Washington Redskins 50/1

I know I know, they don't know Marv like we know Marv and Willis sucks and all but I wonder how this board might react if we ended up 4-12 or 5-11 next year. Any gamblers out there know if this really is how wise guys see us right now?

I think this is a bad idea. Henry defines the classic workout warrior - he was basically an above-average track guy pretending to be a below-average RB at U of A. Perhaps more than most positions, grading a running back should be 75% productivity - true skills aren't hidden on the football field. Unless he had an awful offensive OL, I'd be very wary of straight line speed numbers: In 35 games at Arizona, Henry started six times. He rushed 269 times for 892 yards (3.3 avg.) and nine touchdowns. He snatched 26 passes for 205 yards (7.9 avg.) and a score. He also returned four kickoffs for 25 yards (6.2 avg.) and recorded one solo tackle. Compare those numbers to those of Kenneth Darby - who ran behind one one of the worst OLs in the country: In 47 games at Alabama, Darby started 31 contests. He ranks third in school history with 3,324 yards on 702 carries (4.7 avg) and 11 touchdowns. He also made 70 catches for 340 yards (4.9 avg) and a pair of scores, adding four solo tackles with two fumble recoveries. Compares To: DeAngelo Williams, Carolina Panthers (Memphis) -- Darby is bigger than Williams, but both rely on their exceptional burst, outstanding field vision and instincts with the ball to be slippery outside runners. Darby has a great feel for the crease and cutback lanes, but relies more on his elusiveness; he doesn't have the ideal strength to be a power runner. I like this kid in the middle rounds if we don't get Lynch. He has good hands and unlike some of the big backs, he'd be a good complement to the A-train.

Actually, unlike a lot of tripe that spout opinions, I found that article pretty factual and interesting. This being a rather weak year for RB, I still think Marshawn Lynch is in the running as our pick - an all-purpose back with speed and hands (I just don't think Peterson's a good fit for Fairchild's offense.) Unfortunately, the loss of 2 LB this offseason makes this a tough sell for a 1st pick.

actually being 2 years removed from this injury is a big difference - see Julian Peterson

I'm just playin' ... don't take me too literally. There are no bad suggestions, just people who make too many of 'em.

Oh yeah, Lavar would be great! And by great I mean "gawd no!" I'd rather have a recovering Spikes than Arrington ... worlds of talent, unable to play within a scheme, and costing at least as much as all our prospective draft picks put together. Yah that should work.

And if you were the half the person I thought you were before your response, I'd be angry ... or at least pi$$ed ... possibly even perturbed. Jeez, look what you made me do for my 500th post - hope you're happy. I'll have you know I was planning a diatribe worthy of Pyrite Gal but noooooo, someone's got to be a total ^&%$ - sheesh.

Todd, I hate to say it but I agree with him as well. If you asked most NFL scouts who were the 10 most talented players we had on our team last year, I'd reckon most people would include Fletcher, Clements in that group. Spikes, if he has recovered to even 80% of his 2004 talent, would probably also be in that group. McGahee, even with his problems, would fit there as well. I don't blame Marv for doing what he's doing - but make no mistake, this is a rebuilding year and we should not expect to be any more than a .500 team. My primary beef with the Bills front office is what we paid Walker and what we paid Kelsay - this resembles the Peerless signing last year - not bad moves per se, just way more than market value for their skill level - and these signings limit what we can pay potential game changers like Evans and (possibly) Losman. What I'm surprised at is the overwhelming number of knowledgeable fans on this board who have a hard time admitting that we will probably be worse before we get better based on our moves this offseason. Who knows, maybe we'll strike lightning in a bottle and Lynch (or Peterson or whoever in this weak RB class) becomes a capable performer instantly - or better yet, Willis or Poz is an impact starter that vastly improves our run D - or Youboty or Hall becomes a solid corner in short order. Overall, I expect our offense to improve a bit if we get Lynch or Turner but I don't see our defense looking better no matter who we draft. I'm a diehard fan but it's hard to deny we've lost an awful lot of leadership and talent over the last couple months.

Fair enough. More importantly though, that doesn't explain your perpetually changing icon ... I know I check in to the Wall just to see the latest creative knockoff.