Koufax

+1, especially when the reason he is valuable is because he can make dynamic plays when he touches the ball that change the game. We have two other chain moving RBs so this is not like having your QB play the wedge buster...this is taking one of our top talents and trying to put him in place for making an impact. We also don't have to worry about him being gassed because it is not a problem to have Freddie or Beastmode in there on the first down or two of a series and then have him rotate in. McKelvin and Roscoe are also very good at returns, so he also doesn't have to be fulltime at either of those return positions and we can go with who is healthiest/doing the best/most dynamic. But having two explosive deep men on kick offs also prevents teams from kicking away from the home run hitter.

+1. Dick and concussions create a big if, but I wholeheartedly believe he has the talent and brains to be successful in this league. Not sure if too much damage is done already, but I'm sure hoping not, and that Chan can work some magic.

+1 Even in game 16 of a lost season, hope your team wins. I will say it again and again: the experience of winning football games for the 30+ guys who will return always matters more than a slot or two in the crap shoot. Is Luck Manning or Leaf? There are so many busts of top 5 QBs and many success stories later, that throwing a whole season down the drain and every hoping for a loss even a single game much less a whole season is completely foolish and also embarrassing. And I still don't have the slightest idea why people think that this team is worse than the team it took a perfect storm to drop to 6-10. This team is a middle of the pack team from 5 to 9 wins, and with those numbers draft position doesn't matter as much as decision making. I would rather have Trent succeed surprise, etc, and have us a month in to the season realize how nice it is not to have Mauron in charge. I don't mind that others are setting the bar very low, but I will put my dollar down on the over for the season.

I'm sorry to see it play out this way, but this is the way it is in the NFL, and I don't have a big problem with it. Too bad he didn't want to be with us during the rebuilding and the new defense. Too bad Houston didn't want to give us anything. But he is not interested in playing for us, we don't have a trading partner, and we aren't going to deal with a mini-Favre situations of having a guy in camp who is only there to get out of there and force our hand. As for the you have a contract you should show up and play, I love the unicorn-filled world where that is true, but we know the NFL is all about contracts that are not to be respected...either renegotiated because they aren't enough, or released while years are left because the team needs to save cap space. So I don't have much more of a problem with this than if he were a free agent and signed a two million dollar one year deal with the Texans. Would be nicer to have seen him retire a Bill, but not worth shedding a tear. He has been a good soldier and a good player through a lot of stuff and very little winning. I don't begrudge him whatever he wants to do in 2011, whether be with the Texans or go try to win somewhere else.

Grammer aside (since that was covered). I think that the concept of due probably applies less to football offenses than anything else. Being bad doesn't create an increased likelihood of being good. But, on the other hand, doing as poorly as we have done on that side of the ball certainly makes improvement a pretty obtainable and reasonable goal.

I've never regretted passing on a DT that the Ravens later selected...no wait... Nose tackle is a tough position to evaluate for reasons like this, but the first practices don't mean much...I'm sure he will be contributing to the Ravens soon enough, but I am still glad we didn't take him.

I couldn't agree more. I love how we are this year's whipping boy. We are a team that needed a perfect storm to fall from 7-9 to 6-10. Now somehow getting to 6-10 would be a miracle? But the reality is none of these guys can really follow and understand all the teams, and it is easy to focus on "no QB, no LT, no playoffs in a decade" rather than actual analysis. So somehow they place us in a position to win 2-3 games for the season and despite our young players, positive new coaching staff, etc., we should be the worst Bills team since we drafted Bruce Smith if not worse. If John Clayton will put some cash on the table I will take the over...

I agree, especially with the second and third point. LT is clearly a very very important position, but Orlando Pace and Jonathan Ogden have two combined rings, not every championship for a decade. We need to be solid at LT, but our guys can be solid without being on the Hall of Fame track. I especially think with Chan using Trent effectively on shorter passing to Spiller, Freddie, Roscoe (I enjoyed the first 58 minutes of last season's opener) we don't need a LT who can pancake Julius Peppers or let Bledsoe count to seven in his head without getting flattened to be successful. I think a healthy Bell has a good chance of being a solid performer. If we can get better at this position (or any other) in a way that makes sense to our overall progression, even better than the status quo. And a bold move for Marcus McNeill? Not sure how the Nix-AJ relationship is, but that could be a win win that makes both teams better in the right way. AJ gets to show his Chargers you toe the line or get shipped off to Buffalo, McNeill gets big money for a team with a bright future and the Bills get a young good proven LT who is otherwise about to risk taking a prime of his career year off. Go Bills.

Thanks. I appreciate your permission to continue kidding myself. Next time I will make sure I submit a written request with your office before doing any self-kidding just to make sure my paperwork is legit. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of our LT situation. I am always going to err on the side of irrational but just barely plausible optimism. But it also appears that our very experienced front office combo of Nix and Gailey seem to think our personnel on hand are qualified to play LT. If they thought it was as dire as you pretend, then they wouldn't have passed on LT for four straight rounds with good players. I'm sure they do feel it is an area that could be improved, and Gaither will remain on their radar if the price is right, but that Bell can not be "reasonably expected" to avoid being one of the six worst LTs I think is more uncertain than you do. But we don't need Bell to be named to the Pro Bowl this year. He can be a solid player if he continues to improve and learn after being thrown to the wolves last year. And if that doesn't happen maybe we can finally have that "top 5 pick" that the "realists" have been insisting on each of the last five years. My money is on 8-8, we forget about the LT situation a few weeks into the season as we get adequate performance from the guys on our roster, and we welcome some of the "realists" back on to the excitement bandwagon for the 2011 season if there is one.

We have a LT. We have several. The coaching staff passed on LTs in the first four rounds with a pretty good understanding of our personnel. I expect Bell to have a better and healthier 2010 than 2009. I don't think he will make the pro bowl. Can he be passable and have us not talking about a "hole at LT" all season? Absolutely. Will he? We will have to wait and see. Losing a second rounder in the second draft for a new GM with a scouting expertise only makes sense if the value is there. If they think the Gaither-Bell upgrade is not as great as we think, and the dollars it would cost will hurt in other areas (forget the cap, whatever Ralph allows is what we have and spending it smartly still matters), then giving up a second would be silly. The equation is if: Gaither > (Bell + 2011 2nd + Gaither extension dollars spent elsewhere) That's a lot of potential value on the right side. Everyone acts like all we have to give up is a 2nd that would be wasted on a Parrish or Hardy. But it is more complicated than that, and I trust Chan/Nix are better off at evaluating the each of those pieces and how they impact the ability to get the Bills to the playoffs. I would still love to see Gaither as a Bill, but I would also be happy to see Bell do well, and the Bills keep building with an impact player with next year's 2nd rounder.

Hmmm...I can't say that I agree with your detective work. Pessimist: overly negative "EVERYTHING AT OBD SUCKS!!!!" and "With the #1 pick the Buffalo Bills select...", but also those who Optimist: (me) overly positive "EVERYTHING IS PERFECT!!!!" and "19-0", check Realist: someone who has assessments of the team tied to reality Realist is someone who decides independent of whether Scott Norwood missed a kick, or that our streak without the playoffs guarantees we won't be in the Super Bowl, or that Eric Flowers, Mike Williams, etc. have anything to do with this team. Realist does not indicate you are completely accurate in your assessment, just that it is based on reasonable analysis of the things that make teams win and lose. I think realists probably have this team as a 4-12 to 9-7 team. I think outside that range and you are an optimist or a pessimist (who could end up being right, but just because the outcome is different doesn't mean the expectations were reasonable). I am an optimist. I admit it, and I will routinely value this team as better than they are (but probably by one or two wins, and not way off the chart). But the guys who say we will be 2-14 and are "just being realistic" are not. I do think this team has more talent than people realize, and that it was obscured by Jauron and injuries. Whether a new coach and a switch to a 3-4 outweigh that and we really are worse than the 6-10 of last year remains to be seen, but I have a tough time seeing it. It took a perfect storm last year to shake this team off of its 7-9 foothold, and I don't understand why that is out of reach for a much better coaching staff with a draft class at quick impact positions.

How many of Bell's penalties were false starts on no huddle plays? I think Bell will be a much better football player Sept 2009 than Sept 2010, and will be in a much better situation to succeed. And I think he will once again be our starting LT in the opener. How he does remains to be seen, but if our guys are healthy I think our line will be much less of a problem than the current conventional wisdom would lead you to believe.

I'm always an optimist, so just because I think they will be okay has no bearing on reality, but consider: Clayton doesn't really know anything about the Bills. He has three real teams to follow and has to occasionally fulfill his contractual AFC East obligation and make up some stuff about the Bills. He doesn't really have an idea of what is going on, and I STRONGLY assert on the having a clue scale the following order: Coaching Staff & Front Office > Studious Bills Fans (like us) > Clayton/King > Casual Bills Fan To be very blunt, I think that Clayton spends LESS time looking at the Bills than we do, so why would he somehow be in a position to offer an insightful observation that would make us all interested? Nope...he offers fluff pieces for the casual masses. The 3-4 could present a bigger challenge than I understand and help make us worse on the front 7 then we were last year. I don't personally see it, and think our added talent (draft + Maybin from nothing to maybe something - potential loss of Schobel) on the front 7 will make a bigger difference than the learning curve. Secondary is intact, Byrd with a year under his belt and McKelvin healthy? BETTER O-Line. Here is where I think people really are missing the picture. The median expected outcome of our O-Line with average expectations on growth and injuries to me is a ton better than last year when we set some injury records, set some inexperience records, and did the whole Walker/Bell No Huddle fiasco. Backfield...three headed monster vs. Freddie by himself for four games then Marshawn trying to catch up? Way better. Even if we trade Lynch way better Receivers: Clayton picks on us here, but Owens and Reed were not in the plans of the coaching staff because they think the other guys will help us be better. Is Reed really better than Stevie Johnson? Is Hardy really never going to play? Is it impossible that Chan finds a way to use Parish? Might we have drafted a surprise contributor (not to play the Colston card, but we might get something out of that). Is Spiller going to get some touches out of the slot too? A lot of questions, but with any O-Line/QB improvement compared to last year I think we clearly have the potential to have a more effective receiving corp than last year. Special Teams: Here we are going to miss Bobby, but we still have the same kicking/punting and return personnel plus Spiller, so while I would expect some regression, I think we will be good just the same. Coaching: I will withhold comment, but those who think 2010 will be worse coached than 2009 raise a hand. So while Nix and Chan might be willing to take some punches as they build for the 2011 season, I have a hard time seeing how this team is worse than last year. And last year it took a lot of going wrong for us to get to 6-10. If this season ends up being a 4-12 year as we retool I can probably live with that, but I think the talent and the focus of the coaching staff will both lead to 7 to 9 wins. The good news is that as every full year ahead mock draft shows us, we don't need to be drafting #1 or #2 to get the player that people say NOW will be going in those slots Go Bills

Rhetorical question, or are you asking me? Because my answer is 9-7, 10-6 WITH NO HESITATION. Gain experience and lose enough to get a top QB? Get experience LOSING is not as valuable as getting experience winning. And drafting #4 is not that much better than drafting #14 when you factor in dollars and uncertainty. Not just to talk about the top QB busts, but realistically compare these picks in the same draft: Ryan #3 vs Flacco #18 Russell #1 vs Quinn #22 V. Young #3 vs Cutler #11 Alex Smith #1 vs Rodgers #22 Eli Manning #1 vs Rothlisberger #11 I'm not saying I would rather have the lower guy each time, but those are five straight years where a top 10 QB vs a later first round QB is at least debatable. Drafting high doesn't cure this team. Playing winning football and drafting smart does. I'm in 2010 for what we can do in 2010, not for solidifying our next draft position. Back to the original post. If we are healthy this line will be fine. Bell is a project at LT, but is in better position this year even coming off the injury, than as a brand new guy getting thrust in to a no huddle opening week. Gaither would be better, but I think we probably won't give up the picks/players necessary. The rest of our guys give us quality on the line and young depth (so more room for someone to emerge than if it were all veteran depth). A lot of unknowns, but I think we are a lot better than most people think, and Gailey is a good offensive mind to understand the talents we have and design a scheme to work effectively.

Yes, yes, what was Jonathan Ogden thinking. NBA or a Bouncer...no room on the O-Line for that kind of height. http://www.nfl.com/players/jonathanogden/p...le?id=OGD403291

Yeah. We will be lucky to have everything go as well as last year. We need to quit kidding ourselves to think there is any reason to think that this team might be able to win more games than last year's train wreck. Granted we didn't have any injuries last year or coaching problems. I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter. It took four tries to not win 7 games, so with all the potential improvements of this team it would take the us being "lucky" to get to 6 wins. I think this year could break a lot of different ways, and I don't think we will win the Super Bowl this year, so it is a building block that if 5-11 or 9-7 it's okay with me as long as we are moving in the right direction. But I don't think we are blowing up what we had and mailing it in this year, and I don't think our talent and coaching is worse than 7-9 Mauron's reign, so I don't think 6 wins is a stretch or lucky.

Can anybody tell me why this thread is necessary, when there is a 14 page Gaither thread with 260+ posts? I'm not sure if there is anything substantively different in this thread's subject that it should be split off and not keep things in one place. I'm not saying we HAVE TO have a single "Official Gaither Trade Thread", but look around before starting a thread and see if there is somewhere else that might make more sense. I would sure see this "fwiw" OP could have gone on page 14 of that original thread pretty easily.

Depends on how he is in the slot. From the backfield I am happy with 15 or so. Also depends on if McLovin is ready to return kicks at an elite level in which case I think he can share the load on returns. I think he is clearly as a style of player somewhere between Tomlinson and Reggie Bush, and it is up to our staff to make him have an impact. I don't think 25+ will help him make as big an impact. I want him fresh and explosive every touch, and hope Marshawn will stay around to be our masher and wear down the lineman a little.

Keeping Peters would have "cost" us a 1st rounder and more money. So comparing a 1st and loads of money to a second and somewhat less money isn't really direct. Also, Peters had proven that he was willing to hold out and half-ass it for the team that made him. Gaither hasn't held out or demanded anything, and might just be interested in playing with a chip on his shoulder over the whole thing.

I think Bell becomes the backup at LT. I think that is his position whether he can play there or ends up not making it, and he doesn't have any advantage on a move to RT. And Meredith and Wang compete at RT. I too think a next year round 2 is fine, even if we have to pay the guy. Paying a good LT is a good thing for good football teams, and I don't see anybody else here that fits the bill. I don't understand the desire to get rid of Lynch. I think he is a power guy who fits in with Spiller and Freddie, and I don't see us needing to dump him. We need a pick that is worth the move, not just to free up a spot for someone from the practice squad because he got stopped by the cops once and eluded them another time.

No chance the Bills pick #1. Really just a joke and an embarassing lack of understanding by McShay. This team won at least 6 games for three years with Mauron, had EVERYTHING go wrong last year between injuries, the no-huddle cut your left tackle, fire your coach stuff. Other than losing TO (and potentially Schobel) we have more talent across the board. I think this team is in the hunt for the #1 about as much as we are in the hunt for PTR's #32. One game at a time, but this team is much better than people think right now, but probably not good enough to have us excited past Christmas. My hope is that they can build enough that we go into the last few weeks at least with some playoff scenario threads, even if we fall short. I think there is a lot of 2010 before we have to worry much about 2011.

I think Trent's slide from promise and his hot 4-0 start in 2008 relates to the concussion 1st, Mauron's offense 2nd, and the O-Line 3rd. He clearly gets a chance at a better offensive scheme with a better offensive mind and losing one old toy (TO) for one new toy (Spiller). The O-Line will be better than 2009, but could still get in the way and we have a lot of uncertainty. The concussion stuff I have no read on. Hopefully with some distance he can get some confidence back. I still think he is the guy who will win the competition, and has the best chance of the four of being a winning NFL QB. Fitz is a better fit than Brohm for a backup, so if Brohm can't win the job outright I see him falling to #3, and Brown on the practice squad until they like him more as a #3 than Brohm.

Mel Kiper's job is not to be right, it is not to win football games. It is to entertain his audience. The way he does this is by digesting and making accessible what would otherwise be an impossible and unentertaining process. Can you imagine following the draft if there was no analysis and projection, but just college football games and then the draft? It would be like watching the MLB draft after the first round, something only the rediculously over-informed could enjoy. Mel has one view on things that is different just like each of the 32 teams has a board different from the others. I would guess he has fewer resources and man hours going in to his analysis than a typical team, but I could be wrong. He certainly has much less information about each individual team and it's needs than the team's war room does. Kiper makes it fun, but when he is right or when he is wrong or what he says about your team has no real baring on winning and losing football games. He is there to add to our fan entertainment, and he does.

It was not a position of need in terms of formation, but it was a position of need in terms of talent: Playmaker. If anybody doesn't think we got the top offensive playmaker in the draft, for a team that was dismal offensively, I ask (honestly, not sarcastically) to know who did. We are not winning the Super Bowl in 2010, and that wouldn't be any different if Bradford or Okung fell to #9. But this guy is going to be in a Bills uniform in 2010 helping create excitement and win football games, and he is going to be in a Bills uniform in 2013 doing the same. A lot can happen over the next five seasons, so we can keep an eye on Clausen (although a big reach at #9 in hindsight...maybe we shouldn't have passed at #41), Dan Williams, and Bulaga or Anthony Davis and see how smart this pick was in five years. As surprised as I was, I actually love it, and think it helps us be better in 2010 and in the seasons that follow. Being forced to live in the terrible sunshine of San Diego, I watch about 14 Chargers games a year. Despite being lighter, I can't tell you how much he reminds me of LT. Not saying he will be that good, but the way he moves and uses his speed makes me think he is a similar kind of threat. But we will have to wait and see since draft week is not the best time to assess talent, as this was said about LT: "GAZING INTO THE CRYSTAL BALL... Once he adjusts to running from a pro-set instead of a veer offense, watch him grow into a very effective back. Definitely starting material, but he has enough to only garner All-Pro consideration eventually, but this is no franchise back (or anyone else) here, folks. His numbers are very impressive, but he's a product of the team's system. Too bad too many general managers are desperate for a running back, as he'll go higher than his stock dictates."

So you are pretty sure that the #1 pick in the draft is going to be better than the #10 pick by enough to suffer through a terrible 0-16 year, to have that kind of failure for the guys on the 53 man roster who will be returning, and spend 40 million more than the #10 pick? I...DO...NOT...AGREE I have no interest in the #1 pick even via trade up (although if value were there I'd consider it, but that never happens), and certainly not through extensive failure in year one of the new coaching staff. I happen to think Jake Locker is overrated, and might just have a Brady Quinn draft/career arc. If Trent Edwards can get back on track where he was before his concussions under a much better offensive head coach, he will be a good QB. If he can't he will be a backup QB for another team pretty soon, not a mediocre starter for us. And how are we doing things the same over and over? We have a new coaching staff, are moving to a 3-4, potentially a zone blocking scheme, and just had a draft focused on difference makers and big trench guys. I'm sorry we went 5-11,7-9, 7-9, 6-10 too, and I couldn't wait for Mauron "winning football games is really hard" to be our ex-coach, but I'm over it. I'm sorry we didn't get our big name coach, but I also think that Nix/Gailey can do a lot of different things than we have seen, and I'm going to keep my optimism and see how things come together.