Rubes

Just when you think you have a grasp on the whole salary cap thing... Okay, so one of the points that has been made time and again during this whole Ralph debacle is the one made (again) today by Pitoniak in the D&C with respect to sh!tbags like Jones and Snyder: They have more dough, so they can pay out higher signing bonuses. WTF? I thought all signing bonuses count against the cap, it's just a matter of how much and over how long a period of time. When don't they count against the cap?

I would imagine that, if Ferguson manages somehow to fall to us at #8, that the price for trading down would almost be too good to pass up... That would make for quite the dilemma.

I still don't understand all of this talk. From all that I'm hearing from OBD, we need a nose tackle and an under tackle. The under tackle is the guy who is the faster, penetrating guy, which is supposed to be Triplett. The nose tackle is the guy who occupies two blockers. Right now, that's Anderson. Isn't this the type of DT we're looking for in the draft? Isn't that what Ngata does? (Not that I'm rooting for Ngata, I just don't understand all of this talk.)

You mean this didn't give it away??? I mean, just imagining Levy saying that breaks me up.

Well, at least he thinks so. I would like both of these signings. If Wells really does drop down to 230-235, that would be a nice guy to bring in off the sidelines, especially if he can pass block. Reyes would help to solidify the LG spot, for certain...or at least make it less of a liability. Sounds like he really liked his visit, so perhaps we'll hear about a contract offer soon.

"Just by trading back a few slots." It's that easy, isn't it? Sure.

I get the concept of trading down, but you only trade down if: (a) you think the guy's value is less than where you are currently sitting, (b) you can find someone to trade down with, and © the spot you're trading down for is not so far down that you'll still get a shot at the guy. That's a lot that needs to come together, particularly when you consider that not a lot of teams want to trade up to begin with, and you're probably further limiting who you can trade down with by the number of spots you're willing to drop.

So if we pick Huff (and I wouldn't be upset at that move, I would just prefer a lineman), will you be watching Bunkley's career, or Justice's? If they turn out to be All-Pros, will you think we missed out on them? The point being, you're going to miss out on somebody, no matter what.

...and I'm sure folks here will help me to understand better: People talk about Justice being a hot prospect at LT, maybe not quite as good as Ferguson, but excellent nonetheless. But just not at the #8 position. People talk about Bunkley being at least as good, if not better, than Ngata. But Ngata's okay at the #8 position, but Bunkley isn't. Why? I understand that we could probably get these players if we moved down a few spots in the draft, but that requires (a) another team that is willing to trade spots with us, and (b) nobody else picking the player before he gets to us at the lower spot. What if nobody else wants to trade up with us? If the guy grades well and fills a big hole, what's so bad about taking him a few spots higher than he might otherwise go?

So is our strategy to obtain hordes of backups at every position and hope that someone steps up to become a true starter?

It was all his idea.

BB.com has Peerless listed as "first string" opposite Lee Evans.

Yikes, is that their new logo? Cool screen, though.

Oh come on now, Mr. Cranky. So what? No skin off our back. I think most of us already realize this. He's coming off an injury and probably won't be back to form until next year, but I agree that it would be nice to have him on the roster. Good! We need plenty of other positions filled on Day 1. Not sure about this one...why would Rogers come on the market at this point? We already have our deep threats on the team. Peerless would likely be up against a 3rd or 4th DB, which could be a mismatch regardless if he can run a 4.3 40 at this point. True, but we didn't before his signing, so it doesn't exactly change anything. Cheer up! All's well in Bills Country.

I think this is Fairchild's design...he's going to move us to a new style of offense. It will be the 1 center, 3 QBs, and 7 WRs formation. Nobody will know who's throwing the ball, or to whom. We'll need 2 backup WRs for that formation.

I've read that it is currently being worked on, but no details. But don't we already need to draft replacements for about 6 other positions? Why add to the list?

That's funny, I picture him as the guy who keeps sending me those e-mails asking if I would help him out by accepting his $15 million money transfer from somewhere in Africa.

For those of us that feel that it all starts and ends with the quality of each line, ours are woefully lacking. To get to a point where the lines are a strength of this team, it will take at least a couple of years. Others are correct in pointing out that we only have 1/2 of a starting defensive line in Schobel and Triplett. Denney and Kelsay would be good backups, but at this point nothing more. We'll probably fill one of these holes in the draft, but to complete a foursome that can dominate will probably take another off season. The offensive line is such a question mark I don't even know how long it will take. But the fact of the matter is that we haven't a single player that could even take a sniff of the Pro Bowl. Fowler? He might, might, be a serviceable center, but we don't know. Villareal could be solid if he could stay healthy. Peters could be solid if he takes another step forward this year. Gandy is average, maybe solid on a good day. And our LG position is a blank slate. For this group to reach a dominant state, it will take years. We don't really have anyone that looks like they can step up this year to become Pro-Bowl-caliber, although I could be surprised. It's hard to project if any of those positions is really solidified for the long-term. Fowler and Peters probably give the best potential for this, but who knows. It will take this draft and another off season or two to get where we need to be.

Unfortunately, that's the easy part.

Only if they let them play on Saturday!

I think you should B word slap him for it.

I thought I read in one of those stories that this issue was one that still needed to be voted on by the owners. Not sure why, though. It's a terrible thing, to be sure. I would guess it was put in by the bastard new guard owners to prevent any team from being sold in the future to an owner wanting to keep the team in a small market town. Basically it grandfathers in the current small market owners and guarantees that, in the future, all teams will eventually end up in large market towns with no further revenue sharing. You're right, it was basically a big FU to Ralph and the small market owners. It's no secret that they have disdain for the small guys.

Sep 10 @New England - L Sep 17 @Miami - L Sep 24 N.Y. Jets - W Oct 1 Minnesota - W Oct 8 @Chicago - L Oct 15 @Detroit - W Oct 22 New England - L Nov 5 Green Bay - W Nov 12 @Indianapolis - L Nov 19 @Houston - W Nov 26 Jacksonville - L Dec 3 San Diego - L Dec 10 @N.Y. Jets - W Dec 17 Miami - L Dec 24 Tennessee - W Dec 31 @Baltimore - L 7-9 here we come!

Wow...haven't had 100 points in a season since 1979-80....

At least we'll finally get some national airtime at the end of the season.