Koufax

I think the perception of him not caring is way off base, and the reason he eats up the Jets is not because of the Vilma thing. He isn't the top character guy who I want to be the face of the organization and a role model to my son, but he is a very good player who got misused under Mularkey and this year had his ups and downs behind a bad rush blocking O-Line and dealing with a painful injury that lingers. I think he catches a lot of the blame that O-Line deserves. He played solid the first four games behind an O-Line so bad it had to be dismantled, then he got shut down against a Chicago team that dominated us as a team, not Willis individually. Then he had a not so great game against Detroit before getting 120 all purpose yards against a Pats team that dominated us and knew how to take advantage of our old O-Line's last game leading our struggling O. Those three bad games were in the terrible three game losing streak when the team had very little to be proud of, and I don't think Willis could be expected to just go off for 100 each game while the team around him was playing poorly (not that he played great). Then we hit the bye, beat Green Bay but he got hurt, and he missed two big stat padding games against Indy (bad run D and our gameplan) and Texas. He came back awfully quick for cracked ribs, and ran effectively (5.3 per carry) against the very dominating Jacksonville line. Then he got shut down against SD which has a very good line, lit up the Jets as usual, worked hard against Miami, played a good game against Tennessee, and then got shut down by Baltimore. So running behind our O-Line which was inept the first half of the season, and was only able to run to the left the second half of the season, he had bad games against San Diego and Baltimore, and a not so great game against Chicago. Let's see, a terrible O-Line that can only run one way and features road graders Fowler and Preston, and he didn't come up huge against three teams that will likely all be playing next week when only the top 4 are still alive. So let's not invite the guy to dinner or make him the face of the franchise, but I can't agree with all the talk that he doesn't care, doesn't try, and isn't good. Improve our line, run the heck out of Willis during his contract year, and all of this Willis hating will be laughed at a year from now. If you don't like that he has three baby-mommas (and he might not be able to spell "baby" or "mamma") that's fine, but don't go overboard mis-analyzing his football ability or drive because of it.

Everybody against Willis, get on record now so I can make fun of you next year. Talk about selling low... Willis is not my favorite Bill, not one of the top backs in football, and I will not be too sad if he walks after 2007. But he is better than he is getting credit for, will play with a more experienced offense and a much better offensive line next season, and will have his contract year motivation (most running backs only ever get one of those in their careers). Willis will have a much better 2007 season than any of the replacement options we could consider. I look forward to Willis starting 16 games in 2007 and the Bills going to the playoffs.

Yeah, but LJ can't run against the wimpy Colts run D, so maybe he isn't good after all. I think Willis needs to step up in 2007 behind our revamped O-Line, and prove that he is a good football player, or else he is done in Buffalo. But it would take a great offer from someone else to consider anything other than rooting for Willis to touch the ball 25 times a game for the Bills next year.

Amen. We know Lee is not a weakness, and I don't think Price, Roscoe, Reed are that bad a group to round it out (especially how Roscoe plays when he is on...we need to get him in more). I would love to upgrade Price with a bigger possession receiver as our #2, but I think this is a luxury we can't afford until well after we have improved our lines and other areas.

I don't think Leon Hall will drop out of the top 10. Best corner available and there is always a team or two needing a corner high.

I'm probably repeating things other people have said, but here goes: McCargo is someone who shows significant talent and is still very young. He needs to stay healthy of course, but there is no reason he should not live up to the expectations Marv had when he traded up to pick him. He did not "beat out Anderson and Williams" in camp, but remember that Coy Wire stayed above Whitner on the depth chart as well, and he was listed as the same position as Triplett (not that he couldn't start along side him at some point, but that wasn't where he was being penciled in as a rookie). I fully expect that his learning this year through camp and the games he played, plus learning and watching while hurt, means that he should contribute even more in 2007, and not be just a rookie, much like Youboty gets a whole year of learning and practicing against Lee and Roscoe and Price. So I'm curious to see McCargo prove it on the field and help us win games, but I don't see any reason for alarm or considering him a bust at this point. I think we could have handled the first two rounds better than we did in hindsight, but that is the nature of the draft. I think McCargo will contribute and we will be fine with the pick three years from now looking back on his 2007-2009 seasons.

I know getting run on a lot took some getting used to, but if you think our D-Line plus McCargo is a bigger need than our O-Line starting Preston/Gandy at guards I would like to wholely disagree with you. If your point is that we will get better O-Line value in free agency or with lower picks that is fine, but I think the "we need Pat Williams back" stuff has gone a little too far. Our D with McCargo and another year in the system will play well, although I would like to add another DT somewhere for the rotation. Getting run over all year was very frustrating, but winning seven games and having another 5 decided by a field goal or less shows that things were not as gloomy as they might seem. The path to upgrading a Tampa 2 is not abandoning it, and we saw how Indy went form can't-stop-the-run to doesn't-give-Larry-Johnson-a-first-down in days. So I'm all for getting a good DT somewhere to go with Larry, McCargo, and Kyle, but I think it is far from our top need, and to pick one at #12 he better be clearly the best player available at that pick. But offensive guard is by far our top priority even if we don't decide to use #12 to upgrade it.

We need to add a DT somewhere this off season. I think where we take him depends on how we go about upgrading our other positions (OG and potentially CB/MLB) and who is available. It could be a low profile free agent to be #4 in the rotation behind Larry, McCargo, and Kyle, or it could be the #12 pick to be our #1 in the rotation above all three of those guys. I personally would rather it be somewhere in between, maybe a good #3 guy ahead of Kyle with a 3rd or 4th round pick, because I think that when the rubber meets the road, OG (or two) and replacements for Nate/London if they leave are more important than tackles, especially with McCargo coming back and Kyle getting a year stronger, and those guys learning to work together better in the system.

I think we can certainly trade the pick if we get more draft value in return. We need to take advantage of some team getting jumpy to get a particular guy or draft a particular need. But I don't think Marv will do it. I would be tempted to trade down if the best player available at our pick is not a OG/DT/MLB/CB/TE, because when you actually make a pick it should be for the best football player available at that pick, and if that position doesn't match up with your needs, take him anyway, or trade down for more picks.

Schobel had a better season and deserves the Pro Bowl nod, and I'm very happy for him. Freeney is a better player, and probably as good as most people rate him, while Aaron is still a very good player and definitely underrated in the past (maybe the Pro Bowl selection will change that perception). I don't think you are necessarily a troll, but the topic was started in a incitING rather than insightFUL way, designed to get a reaction out of the people don't see things the way you do. If I thought you were a troll I would not comment because I believe in a strict do-not-feed-the-troll policy, but I do think that these types of threads don't generally add much to our boards, and prefer threads that present different well formed opinions and explanations of interesting topics.

I'm not as scared by McGee/Youboty, although it is clearly a downgrade. It is a downgrade that might not be as big as people think if Ashton develops, and it is a downgrade that would free resources to improve this team in other positions. I was also wondering how Clements compares to Asante Samuel both in terms of playing ability and contract expectations. Samuel has the side benefit of taking him away from the Pats (although he might be leaving anyway), and if he is cheaper he might be a better value and fit. I still want us to re-sign Nate before he hits the open market, but I don't think we are a team to be in a bidding war for a top-paid free agent CB, even if he happened to wear our jersey in 2006. If we can't sign him before the open market I think we have to consider him lost and move on.

If the only improvement we make to our guards is signing Holland, we have had a failed off season. This is our biggest need by far, and I don't have to specify who we get for each position or where we draft, but we need to make getting the most guard improvement we can. Maybe Gandy can stay if we decide for a big upgrade at the other guard and don't have the resources/players available to upgrade Gandy and get good value, but I would rather see Gandy replaced as a starter along with Preston (no brainer). I also would not want to upgrade center before a second guard, with Fowler having Preston and Merz behind him already and think an upgrade here might be more luxury than necessity compared ot the rest of the line

This is a good comparison in terms of how to be smart and look for the best value and not pay $126 million to a player who is not worth $126 million. But the difference is that the A's work in a different system with big payroll discrepencies that the NFL salary cap does not allow. So we should let Nate go if he costs more than he is worth (if the improvement of having him is less than the improvements we could make with that money if we spend it elsewhere), but I also think he is worth a lot, and should try to make him a pretty big offer before he hits the market. There are many misconceptions about the salary cap, but I think a big one is that since lots of teams have more cap space than in the past (and the money to fill it), yet the players available are no different than a typical year, there will be some drastic inflation this off season. Players will sign this off season for prices that would have seemed impossible last winter, and any players you can lock in before this reality sets in will be available at better levels. So we have to figure out the best way to spend our 35 million (I hope we don't stay under the cap), and signing Nate and London early might be a lot easier than signing Steinbach or Tony Gonzalez in the open market.

Right. I don't think there is anybody other than Peters who we need to keep, but at the same time replacing four people on the O-Line with upgrades (not just warm bodies) is too much. So we have to decide who the tribe votes out. Any of those four could be replaced, so nobody is safe, but I see Pennington and Fowler a notch above Gandy, and two notches above Preston, so we have to pick our options based on what is available, and which of those four pieces are most likely to perform league average or better.

Don't forget LT/Michael Turner in SD. LT is so good that that isn't a huge split, but Turner still makes big carries, and allows LT to get a rest without the team losing production or being forced to pass. I still like Willis as a workhorse behind an improved line. We really did run only one way for half a season, because Preston/Pennington couldn't get the job done. Upgraded guards and I think we have a different story. I'd rather upgrade guards than Willis.

Maniacs? I hope you mean our maniacal interest in improving this team and not that our O-Line somehow magically became anything other than our #1 priority. I'd like a DT and LB help, so I'm not suggesting that we pick seven O-Linemen, but we need to upgrade this position a lot, and also could consider a pass catching TE (although not necessary) RB/FB help, and a bigger possession receiver. Having Youboty an McCargo as aquisitions effectively, and getting Crowell back, changes the D needs from how they seemed on the field the last month of the season. Not that the D is perfect or should be ignored, but I think this off season will be 50% or more offense.

Yeah, I think the ripple effect is VERY important to consider. We saw how much better it worked when Nate lined up on the #1 receiver in the second half (we would have won the Detroit game if they thought of that sooner). If we bring Nate back and Ashton develops, we move McGee to nickel and he has fresher legs for kickoff returns. I don't think we will have cheaper alternatives to Nate that don't cost us elsewhere. Spending a top pick means one more position that we have to address in free agency rather than the draft. Using dollars on another player still puts us in the crazy market and loses any hometown discount we might have. I think the key here is to make Nate a big agressive offer early. I think if we sign him it should be before he gets flown to Washington on Snyder's jet, etc. This market is going to move fast, and what seemed like overpaying Nate early might seem like a bargain a few months later. The other half of that is not letting the market force us to overspend IF we can get better value in other ways (upgrading another positions more and accepting a downgrade at corner), but I think Nate is good enough, and the free agent spending is going to be crazy enough that we would overpay less to keep Nate (and draft a top guard) than to sign Steinbach, lose Nate, and have to draft a top corner. For quick reference, Champ Bailey signed a 7/$63m, and McAlister was 6/$48m, Winfield was 6/$35m a couple years back. I think that we are looking at a number closer to Champ, but in this market and changing caps might be more of a bargain than it seems.

I'm very disappointed that he didn't play and contribute, like our 5th and 7th rounders did, but I also agree that he was coming into one of our stronger units. WE may have wanted to see him in game action, but remember that DJ sees him trying to cover Lee and Peerless and Roscoe all week long all season long. What bothers me is the idea that he was not able to recover from his slow start to push KT or McGee on the depth chart, although I also think that with the unit performing well and DJ's loyalty to players, he wasn't going to rock the boat just to rock the boat. Hopefully it isn't a sign of something worse. So I'm really disappointed that for 2006 we got zero contribution from a first and third round draft pick, along with not having a 2nd rounder. That's a long draft gap between starting safeties at #8 and #105. But still, between Whitner, Ko, Kyle, Ellison, and Pennington, I think we got plenty of contribution in the first year from this draft. So we can afford to have two slow starters. What is exciting is that McCargo and Youboty both have the upside to be the equivalent of first round picks in 2007, and if both can contribute as rookies+, I think that bodes very well for our future.

Our O-Line is not good, and people have to be careful not to judge it as good. I want to pick up a fourth DT to go with Larry, Kyle, and John, but to consider this a priority above RG is crazy (not saying which pick for which, because often you can find value lower for OG). Same with LB unless Fletcher walks. It is an area I'd like to upgrade, but not a crucial need like O-Line. So weaknesses on the O-Line right now: #1 RG - Preston can return to the backup role and try to climb the depth chart at starting center. We need a new RG. #2 LG - Gandy has seen his ceiling and it is called "okay". He hasn't sucked like he did at LT, but there is a reason that even though most of our running was the left, we often went outside. If we can find a second guard better than him for a decent value I would love to make the upgrade here as well. #3/4 RT/C - I don't think we upgrade three O-Line positions, which would neglect other areas, but neither Pennington nor Fowler really shined. Pennington is big and young, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed he can develop, and would definitely get my starting nod right now. Fowler is smart and does his job, even if he doesn't have the size and strength to be better than that. I hope Preston or Merz pushes him out over the next couple years on merit, but I'm not going to use resources adding another center right now. Obviously we have only one of five positions that shines, and that is Left Tackle. Peters is a joy. Watch him for a whole game just focusing on him (BuffaloBills.com cam if you want). He made Gandy look better than he was (like Preston made Pennington look worse than he was), and is a true joy to have on this team long term.

Yeah, we reached for Whitner, and maybe should have taken Ngata or traded down, but it happened and we have a quality player out of it. I sure hope they are right about McCargo. I think he has a lot of upside and will hit camp next year in better shape and more mature than this year, and be more than a rookie. Could end up being one of our biggest off season acquisitions in effect. I haven't seen any mock's that shed much light on anything, but they still are fun to look at. Bookmark some of them so you can go back and laugh on draft day. A very very inexact science.

I hope we can keep Nate, but I think it would be stupider for us to tie up too many resources and ignore other needs by overpaying him in what is likely to be a crazy market with overspending owners. If he walks we are instantly a worse team, so I hope we find a way, including some pretty big money. But we have to find the best value out there, and we don't determine Nate's price...31 other owners and Nate himself determine that. We need to go as high as we can and still find value, but not go past what makes sense just because another owner decides to.

That's what I think. I don't see any of the teams going into SD and winning. The two losses on the season were to KC and Baltimore, who could end up being the exact two teams they have to beat to go to the Super Bowl, but I think that the Chargers match up well with each, and nearly beat each one the first time around on the road. The Patriots are like the Yankees. I'm always scared of them until they are eliminated, then I am very happy. In the NFC (stands for Nobody F@#$in Cares), Dallas isn't playing well, Philly and the Giants are flawed teams, and Seattle would have to win on the road. I think that makes the title game between the two by teams, and however tough it might be in CHI, I think the Saints can pull the upset, especially if the QB controversy isn't settled in the first Bears game. SD against NO doesn't seem like a fair matchup, so it would be up to Cinderella magic, and not common sense for the NFC to win.

Just as an initial gesture I opened an "Official" Nate/CB discussion thread. I hope it works, and we can keep it alive and on topic, and start similar threads on the other big topics with clear titles and focuses. So anybody who is onboard on the idea help me out by adding your thoughts on the subject, and then we can figure out what thread to start next (I think starting a couple at a time is fine, but starting 15 official threads at once will probably cause the whole idea to fail).

In the spirit of keeping some focus this off season and avoiding duplicate threads and off-topic posts (as mentioned in another thread ), I'm opening this thread as a place for discussion of Nate Clements, his contract situation, his value, and our alternatives at corner. My opinion is that keeping Nate would be great all things being equal, but with the monster contract he is going to be after (and likely get), he probably does not represent value to the Bills, and we probably have to shed a tear and let him walk. If so, one option is staying with what we have, and hoping Youboty can step into those big shoes, with McGee staying at the other Corner and KT or someone new as the nickel. The worry there is that Youboty was unable to crack our lineup much this year after his slow start, and that might be more responsibility than he can handle this soon. The second option is signing another less expensive free agent corner from a list that includes: Asante Samuel UFA New England Patriots Ken Hamlin, UFA, Seattle Seahawks Roc Alexander, RFA, Denver Broncos Jordan Babineaux, RFA, Seattle Seahawks Jason David, RFA, Indianapolis Colts Randall Gay, RFA, New England Patriots Nick Harper, UFA, Indianapolis Colts David Macklin, UFA, Arizona Cardinals The third main option is drafting a corner high, which I hope we don't do unless there is really exceptional value. I would rather see the first day picks go to the lines, maybe linebacker, and other positions only if they blow us away as the best football talent available at our draft slot. Drafting a planned need can greatly reduce the value you get unless you are lucky. So the question arises what is a fair price for Nate? How high can we go before we have to forget about it? I think Marv should figure that out and make his highest offer pretty early, rather than try to get into a bidding war when Nate is closer to phone calls from Daniel Snyder, etc. I was rooting for Youboty all year, but was very disappointed that he wasn't able to get more playing time away from McGee and KT who are solid but not stellar DBs. Have at it guys, and hopefully this thread can grow long and stay on topic, and we can avoid duplicate threads about the Nate/CB situation.

I think we need to bring some order to the forum, but I don't think a schedule is the answer. I think what matters is reducing the number of threads created (not creating a thread where there already is one), and trying to make posts intelligent and relevent. So I would like to see some big long threads develop for certain topics, and avoid other threads on the exact same topic. I'm with Ozymandius that we should pick out some good thread subjects and start these main topics, and then do our best to discourage other threads covering the exact same stuff. I don't think that they have to be pinned, because if we focus on them they will get bumped to the top naturally, and the ones that aren't interesting can drop off. So certainly a London Fletcher thread and a Nate Clements thread would make sense, covering news and views on these two until their situations are resolved. Ditto for the other free agents, the draft, etc. So let's brainstorm up a good list of some clearly described threads, and then try to discourage/ignore threads that duplicate these subjects, as well as off topic posts to these threads.