BillsVet

It's crazy to think that one off-season will get three new starters and two guys changing positions to gel. Repeatedly remaking OL's is not a proven method of getting a better OL. The best ones in the league, like NYG and TEN needed time to get on the same page. It is entirely possible that the rookies and Hangartner become solid players. But it may be a longer process (as in an entire season) before they're all on the same page as a cohesive unit.

Remember that first statement this season. BTW, Ask Boomer Esiason how must he loved Anthony Munoz. Ditto for Joe Montana and Steve Wallace. Eli Manning and Dave Diehl. McNabb for Tra Thomas all those years. Hasselbeck for Walter Jones. Marino for Richmond Webb. If LT wasn't an especially important position, it's ironic that 1/4 of NFL teams drafted guys in the first round to play the position. In the past two years, Miami, St. Louis, Jacksonville, Denver, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Chicago and Houston have selected guys to play LT for them. It is an extremely important position. And I believe we'll see Walker getting blocking help from a TE frequently this year. I'm glad you have so much confidence in an OL where there will be five new starters at their respective positions, including two rookies. It's not a slam dunk that it's better than 08, 07, or even 06. They'll need to get up to speed really fast.

Certainly Brandon isn't on a short leash, but if he's going to be the GM he should have the powers that the position have. I'd agree on DJ, who out of the "inner-circle" of RW, Littman, Brandon, and Modrak, reportedly only received 2 votes to keep. The best organizations have a GM with strong powers. There are two exceptions, PHI and NE, who have strong HC's with a solid track record of finding and developing talent. The individual serving upstairs (Floyd Reese in NE and Tom Heckert in PHI) are also very strong. It's ironic that so many teams make changes and Buffalo continues with the status quo. I'm not even sure a bad season would change much more than the HC. And even that's not certain.

Each of these teams has very different situations, although the common denominator is missing the playoffs. For SEA and GB, they are one year removed from being playoff teams, as is JAC. The other nine have had issues for some time now, as evidenced by 7 of those teams making major management changes. 1. Detroit-fired COO/GM Matt Millen and HC Rod Marinelli. Replaced with Martin Mayhew and Jim Schwartz. 2. St. Louis-new GM in Billy Devaney and hired Steve Spagnuolo as HC to replace Jim Haslett who replaced Scott Linehan. 3. Kansas City-new GM in Scott Pioli and HC with Todd Haley. Replaced Carl Peterson and Herm Edwards. 4. Seattle-playoffs in 07, ravaged by injury in 08. Holmgren retired and replaced with Jim Mora Jr. 5. originally Cleveland-fired HC Romeo Crennel and GM Phil Savage. Replaced with Eric Mangini and George Kokinis 6. Cincinnati-Owner Mike Brown acts as GM. No changes. 7. Oakland-Owner Al Davis acts as GM. Retained Tom Cable as HC. 8. Jacksonville-fired James "Shack" Harris as VP of Pro Personnel. Replaced with Gene Smith 9. Green Bay-no changes. Ted Thompson remains as GM and Mike McCarthy as HC. NFC Title game participants in 07. 10. San Fran-fired HC Mike Nolan during season and replaced with Mike Singletary. 11. Buffalo-no changes 12. Denver-fired HC/quasi-GM Mike Shanahan and replaced with Josh McDaniels. Also named Brian Xanders GM. Cincinnati and Oakland are run by their owners, and thus operate on different wavelengths. It could be argued Buffalo is closer to these franchises in management and on-field results. The Bills have really hitched their wagon to Brandon as GM. But if Buffalo falters, and it's super early (June!) it is time to look at finding a GM versed in personnel with a solid track record. It goes without saying the front office would need to be nuked and a new HC found. Again, there is a lot riding on this season, being that it's DJ's fourth as HC and Brandon's 2nd as GM.

You're not supposed to disagree with the OP. The post was made to declare that turnovers are the reason and that nothing else affected this team's success in 08. Of course, this argument was blown out of the water earlier and there's much more to team success than turnovers difference. As big an issue as that is, it's not the only one. This is a black and white post which doesn't factor in the gray areas you suggested.

Does it matter who he had on offense? This is a guy who helped build one of the most dominating defenses since the NFL merger. That 2000 defense was excellent, allowing someone like Trent Dilfer to QB Baltimore and win a SB. Last season the team wasn't stellar offensively, although they featured a rookie QB and rookie HC yet still had enough on O to get into the playoffs. Newsome knows what he's doing. Just like Belichick, Pioli, Jerry Reese, AJ Smith, Parcells, Kevin Colbert, Polian, Reid/Heckert, Dimitroff, and perhaps Rod Graves.

You would think an organization not named the Detroit Lions which is eyeing 10 years without a playoff appearance and 14 since a playoff win would receive more criticism. No one's asking for a SB win each season, but some demonstration of success. IMO, most fans would like a playoff appearance, preferably a home game. Bill Parcells and Tom Dimitroff did it in their first season with notoriously sad sack organizations. DJ/Marv/Brandon have had three seasons and done nothing. Unfortunately, having a team is more important to these casual uninformed fans. While many fans have the audacity to ask for success, many fans could care less about results.

Again: How does the 07 team with a harder schedule and more injuries have a TO difference of +9 while the 08 team facing a the 2nd easiest schedule in the NFL have a -8? It's not missed FGs, every team has that. It's not just individual players. We're talking about a net loss of 17 from one year to the next with vastly different schedules. How quickly we forget these games. Blotting out of your memories of last season is key for you here. Rookie HC's with less than average rosters beat Buffalo three times last season: MIA 2x and SF 1x. Not to mention, they were badly outclassed by NE 2x. And who can forget the now fired Mangini beating Buffalo twice. If you want to cite examples where we almost won, cite those. Again, this is a thread initiated by casual uniformed fans who rationalize losing. It's made in order to rationalize that Buffalo is closer to success, yet the Bills who take the field in 09 will be predominantly players with less than or equal to 3 years of experience. The HC loses 57% of his games, and the GM didn't handle personnel before January 2008. There is more to the inferior play than just turnover differential here. It's an organization-wide issue in management and coaching which these casual uninformed fans who rationalize failure love to discredit.

Let me get this straight, and I'm going to illustrate absurdity by being absurd here. The 07 and 08 Bills recorded the same record with very different schedules. Their 2007 tilt was harder than the 2008 schedule. Turnover differential is cited as perhaps the one factor which made for the difference. This is a black and white argument which takes nothing but numbers into account. I would think Buffalo's 2007 +9 (and fourth in the AFC) would make for a better record. In 08, they had a much easier schedule and mustered only a -8. This makes absolutely no sense. How does a team with a harder record in 07 have a better TO ratio, while the 08 team had a worse ranking with a much easier schedule? There's more to this story than TO's.

In 2007, IIRC, Buffalo was tied fourth in the AFC in turnover differential and they finished 7-9. AFC Turnovers 2007 For the record, NE, SD, IND, and JAC all made the playoffs in 07. PIT at +3 and TEN, which finished +1 also made the playoffs. Admittedly, this is one season's worth of stats, but Buffalo was an anomaly during the 07 season in that they were top five in the conference and went sub .500.

They did indeed draft high quite often. As they were essentially rebuilding after the move from Cleveland, they hit with many of those top picks, most of all Ogden. Granted he was one of those "can't miss" prospects, but he also snagged Lewis later in the first of 1996. It's hard to envision that team winning the SB in 2000 without those two. Don't get me wrong, I hate the Ravens, but you've got to admire some of the things Newsome did in getting a title to Baltimore just their fifth season after moving from Cleveland. But trading 2 3rds and a 7th for McGahee really put Buffalo into a position heading into draft day 07. With only Shaud Williams on the roster, the Bills badly needed a RB, in addition to a LB among other things.

Their 2008 playoff appearance suggests that they overcame the McGahee deal quite well, wouldn't you think? And as long as you're ripping Newsome, why not talk about his better moves in drafting: Ray Lewis, Jonathan Ogden, Peter Boulware, Chris McAlister, Jamal Lewis, Adalius Thomas, Todd Heap, Jamal Lewis, Ed Reed, Chester Taylor, Terrell Suggs, and Haloti Ngata. Newsome isn't perfect, but when it comes to building a football team, he's pretty darn good.

Demetrius Bell, according to many on this board, is. Why not?

History (2001-present) would indicate the Patriots are indeed better at knowing whom to release and when. Buffalo, not so much. Of course, that's what happens when, in succession, you have a maniac, 80 year old, and someone who hasn't spent a day in personnel prior to 2008 playing GM.

I said they rarely have busts in the first or second round. Before getting all hot and bothered because you want to discredit me, re-read my post. And for the record, NE has positioned themselves quite well wrt Wilfork. They drafted someon their staff believes can take over for VW. His name is Ron Brace, a big DT from Boston College. That's called leverage, so when Wilfork sits, he'll know his heir apparent could be working for a starting job for down the road.

Every front office makes mistakes. It's the amount of mistakes that contribute to perpetual ineptitude, and the Ravens are usually pretty good. Their GM, HOF TE Ozzie Newsome is renowned for his ability to find talent although trading for McGahee was not his best move. That said, I'd still rate the Ravens front office as one of the better ones in the league. Considering they went deep into the AFC playoffs with a rookie HC and rookie QB, they must be doing enough right.

By having a front office that knows what it's doing. Kevin Colbert and Pioli/Belicheck are some of the finest talent evaluators in the business. They're extremely adept and knowing who to retain and players to replace. They rarely have first or second round bust picks and use UFA effectively. We all know this is a players's league, at least after the former CBA. In order to mitigate this, signing a guy before he gets to star status is imperative. This is where the talent evaluators must coordinate with management. Levy did right by getting Peters a moderate contract in the summer of 2006. This was only half the battle, as Peters moved to LT in mid 06 and did a commendable job. His play was better in 07. After the 07 season, they elected to sit on principle and avoid recognizing the player. So yes, the Bills demonstrated little foresight and creativity. One wonders what may have happened if Buffalo offered an extension after 07. I'm speculating that Peters would be the LOT in 2009. Buffalo's front office has little credibility, given their penchant for making the wrong decision. This is exemplified by the on field product and which remains a point of contention among fans who recognize that success shouldn't take place one each decade.

If the team is relying on no less than five rookies (Maybin, Wood, Byrd, Levitre, and Nelson) to improve their standing in the AFCE, I've got an issue with that. I like their draft, but not the fact that they'll again bank on rookies to improve. If, after three seasons of rebuilding you're forced to count on first year players, that indicates to me that the previous off-seasons weren't all that good. And it would be an indictment of those who make decisions on building a team. For the record, I've read Larry Felser and don't necessarily agree with everything he writes. If people want to say RW knows something about football, then Felser does as well. Covering as many seasons of Bills football means you've seen quite a bit. This is a 7-9 team from a season ago. Rookies are merely something new to hope will make a positive difference. And from a marketing/business vantage point, they're a relatively inexpensive option to hype. History shows that few draft classes move a team from mediocrity to a playoff appearance.

What's completely mystifying is how, out of 31 teams that played the past 10 years, that only two have failed to make the playoffs. Worse yet, the other woeful franchise, Detroit, finally made changes at GM and HC in 08-09. I've got no issue if fans want to hope the team's on the right track. Just provide some evidence suggesting that this is so.

I'm miffed on how any knowledgeable fan can defend an organization that hasn't made the playoffs in nine seasons during the salary cap era. Most of all, I'm miffed at the structure of the organization. There is no one individual managing the football side of the house like most successful franchises feature. Instead, the arrangement is a triumvirate of Wilson, Littman, and to a much lesser extent, Brandon controlling things they have no business or training in handling. And through it all, a respected writer authors something questioning the direction of a moribund team that has proven nothing on the field since the 20th century, and he's instantly discredited. That's mystifying.

Larry Felser, because you don't know, has covered the Bills since Day 1. His opinion is extremely valuable, and here his examples demonstrate a growing trend at OBD: uncertainty and knee-jerk reactions. There is no rhyme nor reason to Buffalo's personnel management and direction of the franchise. Because there is no bona-fide GM holding things together, transactions are made which seem random and unorthodox. Felser is simply pointing out that when Buffalo is faced with a difficult situation, they aren't clear on how to handle it and go with the nuclear option. I would agree.

It'll be interesting to see whether Butler can make the change from RG to RT. Recall that Buffalo didn't really change their draft board upon dealing Peters. That to me is laziness, and an indication they assumed that players could convert when there is no concrete evidence they can. They just had too many holes to fill and not enough picks to do it in. For a team in year four of rebuild mode, that's unacceptable. It's a stretch to say Butler is a slam dunk to make the transition, Chambers can play RT all year, or that Bell is ready. This is a big gamble.

It's not that simple. I'm a Bills fan, and darn tired of losing. While some franchises win regularly, Buffalo finds new ways to lose consistently enough to be neither good or downright awful. Especially when you consider that in the salary cap era that parity is practically legislated by the NFL. When Buffalo had a chance to find a legitimate NFL GM, they reached for a marketing guy. When Buffalo had a chance to fire a HC who hasn't been able to win with draft picks and UFA's he had a hand in acquiring, easy schedules, and three seasons of rebuilding, they didn't. Dissent is healthy for some Bills fans who want more than a 7-9 team which cannot get into the post-season. For those who demand little and are happy to have a team, keep on truckin'. Just don't tell me that maintaining the status quo is good enough. Buffalo hasn't done anything yet, and given their track record of failure, I'm not buying their PR until I see some success on the field.

I'm not so sure Ralph's "way" has been kind to Bills' fans. It's his team, and he can do what he wants with it. But in recent years, it's been one thing after another. I wasn't around in the sixties, but making the playoffs 13 times in 39 NFL seasons is not good enough.

And he still hasn't been able to go .500 in three tries, nor in 4 out of five seasons at his last job. In most other franchises, that'll get you fired, but not in Buffalo. I frankly don't care what happens with other teams. If you can't win by year 3 of a rebuilding plan, you've failed. End of story. And out of that overhaul, none of his picks in UFA and the draft can be considered a playmaker.