Saint Doug

If NC comes out to the media and public and rescinds this clause, there will no harm done to anyone now or in the future. There may be a scenario where NC waives this clause (and lets everyone know this), we tag him, and then trade him to Team X for a draft pick. Team X then signs him for a trillion dollars. In this case, NC leaves on great terms, he hits the jackpot (he's gotta think about his family), we get a draft pick, fan are happy, and current and potential players for this team still have respect for the current management. This is entirely realistic.

If we only get a Franchise QB (totally ignoring Lee Evans pick) out of a draft and everyone else bombs from the draft, I will be happy. I never liked TD, but the years since Kelly retired have been painful. Teams become stagnant without a Franchise QB (just as the fans of the lions, browns, raiders, saints before brees, dolphins, and the list goes on....)

1) Just because players are starting for a previously 5-11 Bills team does not automatically make them good players. That is faulty logic. Look at the Raiders. They had plenty of starters who were horrible. And look at the Bears; they have all-pro starters. The fact is, you can't equate starting with being good (or being bad too). 2) For the DT position, arguing who is starting and who is not is a mute point. They rotate throughout the game. They all should be considered starters. 3) Does it really matter who was picked on Day 1 vs Day 2? Football is a team sport and they are all Buffalo Bills. Why should we be upset we have more starters from Day 2 than Day 1? Would we be upset if all Day 1s were starting and all Day 2s were sitting? That sounds awfully like the TD years. We should rejoice that we found suck gems in the later rounds and let the Day 1s develop more (since they supposedly have greater potential).

Yeah, but with the NFL's Manning family love affair, you never can tell.

OK, let's not get all hung up about Okoye's age. What is the difference between a 24 year old leaving via FA after playing out a 5 year contract verses a 28 year old leaving after his 5 year contract is up? Nothing. Actually, chances are it will be harder to re-sign the 24 year old.

"My family and I have made our home here..." I thought they were spread across southern Florida? He has kids here too?

A (franchise) tag and trade is not out of the question. In this case, both parties would be happy. Nate would go to the skins (or whoever) and make huge bucks and we would get a draft pick. No one would be offended or left bitter. This would NOT leave the bills org with a black eye or turn off future free agents.

Git'er done, Marv.

Yeah. I don't think he realized it. I don't give him that much credit.

This is crap...and the TD lovefest continues.

He wants them athletic and to have long arms.

Fine. But, we need to add a legitimate RB onto our roster for next year. I don't care if he comes from the 7th round or NFL Europe, but he must be able to legitimately compete with Willis (and hopefully beat him out). Willis needs to know that he must be the better RB of the two. If not, he rides the pine. You cannot sit on the bench your contract year or you will watch the prospect of signing a lucrative deal go down the drain. Then after the season, we wish him luck. I am sick of the dancing.

Well, with the 27th ranked rushing offensive this season, we definitely have room for improvement. And contract year motivation sickens me. These people are making millions. Is the potential to make 20 mil instead of 15 mil their only motivation? And if this is the case, what happens the year after the contract year? Willis's motivation and numbers go into the pooper? We might as well just draft a replacement now. They can both share the field for one year while Willis gains motivation to leave. Face it, we need to address the RB position either now or next year. Why is it when we draft a CB with the intention of having our current starter leave, nobody bats an eyelash? I was very jealous watching the playoffs this year. I was watching teams actually run the ball for first downs. Also, excellent RBs will also help the defense. By chewing up the clock, they keep the defense off the field, resting.

The defensive line and O-line can both be fixed by FAs, although a linebacker would be nice with F-B on the way out. And how is having the ability to run the ball sexy? Like Marv say, you need to be able to run and stop the run. A RB, when we have an inadequate running game, is not a "sexy" pick, but more of a neccessity. A WR, TE, DE, FB, QB would be a sexy pick.

Or, it kinda sounds like some stripper's stage name.

My thoughts: 1) Willis's off-field activities have nothing to do with his non-production on the field. Comments aside, he can't get it done. 2) There is nothing wrong with having children out of wedlock IF you are going to be involved in their lives. No, Willis is not an axe murderer, but he is perpetuating a problem we have in this society. I personally work with African American mothers and their children in a very poor area of a large east coast city. It is rare for me to have a meeting with BOTH parents. It is always the mother and the children - no father to be found. Whose fault is this - that's another story altogether. And when there is no father around, you see these kids get into drugs, violence, and teenage pregnancy - the streets become their fathers. It is very sad and the real losers of this whole Willis story is not the fans, the baby momas, Ralph, Rosenhaus, or Willis, but the kids who are now having to grow up without a fatherly figure - no matter how much money the courts throw their way. And Willis is probably no different that at least 50% of the rest of NFL players.

LT, cry me a river. Your team is allowed to do some stupid meaningless dance, but other teams are not. Come on. It's a stupid dance - invented by a player who is a cheater nonetheless. Get over it. As the cliche goes, if you can dish it out, you gotta be able to dish it in.

Agreed. Peters is not moving anywhere...we tried the RT experiment earlier in the season and it failed miserably. Peters is arguably the best LT in the league. Period. Any thought of moving him back to RT is laughable.

Going back to the OP subject, I do agree with part of your post. We absolutely need to be able to run and stop the run to be successful. We do need a great defensive line. However, you then tell us about huge time-eating drives the winning teams accomplished and that we don't have to worry about Willis. When was the last time (excluding Jets game) when we had huge time-eating drives. Whether it be Wills (but I am not holding my breath) or someone else, we need a dominant RB. And I really don't care about Willis's stupid comments - he is not geting the job done on the field. We need him to improve or get an upgrade. Or, get another force in addition to Willis - like the Saints have.

He's not a character guy.

It's not a PORNO, it's art.

Quick question: What makes a FA restricted vs. nonrestricted? Is it years in the league? Or, contract terms? Enlighten me.

IMWT

I believe Marv will do the right thing. I don't want them trying to jam a square peg in a round hole as the Deadskins do. However, I don't think we can look at weight as the sole determining factor for DT eligibility. That is, we cannot say the Bills will pass on a guy who weighs 330 lbs, but will covet a 300 pounder. Afterall, the Bills made a big push for Pickett and he weighs 322 lbs.

I have a question about Terdell Sands v. Ian Scott. Everyone seems to be blowin their load to get Scott, but I don't see the fascination with him. Is it because he plays for the Bears? I know "stats don't tell everything," but look at them in comparison: Sands: TOT SOLO AST SACK INT FF 2006 41 30 11 1.0 1 0 Scott: TOT SOLO AST SACK INT FF 2006 23 16 7 0.0 0 1 Sands is 27 yo and weighs 335 lbs and Scott is 25 yo and weighs 302. Could it be that people don't think Marv will go after a wide-body (Sands) and would want someone that would fit more into the Tampa 2 (Scott)?