BillsVet
-
Posts
10,110 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by BillsVet
-
-
Position non-specific.
-
OK, Dwight Freeney got franchised today. That means, Lance Briggs, Justin Smith, Asante Samuel, and now another standout defensive player are no longer available. If memory serves correct, NFL teams have already utilized the franchise tag more often in 07 than 06 with a few days remaining.
Question is, who is the best free agent available?
-
Let's not take things to extremes. If we don't see the playoffs this year, is that acceptable as long as you believe the team remains in the process of building for the future? I'm just asking there, because I'd like to know what people think. IMO, seven years missing the post-season is a long time, especially in today's NFL. That groups us with the likes of Detroit and Arizona.
I for one figured they'd be 5-11, 6-10 in 2006. They went 7-9. OK, fine as I figured they should get a pass in 06 because they changed GM's, almost the entire coaching staff, and had a question mark at QB. Taking those things into perspective, 7-9 isn't bad. They were rebuilding from a 5 year span that produced very little.
I can understand building through the draft and not spending big money on bad and/or over-hyped free agents. Mortgaging the future with signing bonuese may only give you only a 2-3 year window to win, but being a playoff team 2 out of every 4 years is better than saying we're rebuilding every year.
-
Read what I want out of that....hmmm
I guess I could read it that we won't bid against another team......we only go after a player that no other team wants.
I could also read it as we are not going to get fixated on any particular player & over-bid (due to other teams being interested) to acquire the player.
Which seems closer to what ML probably meant?
I also think he might have had NC in mind when he made the statement.......maybe?
I'm fairly certain those free agents last year (Tripplett, Royal, Reyes, Fowler, P.Price, Bowen, K.Thomas, A.Davis, A.Thomas, and Nall) came to Buffalo because we paid the highest. You could make the case a few of them enjoyed their visit and appreciated the atmosphere so they signed here. But money does talk.
Let's admit to ourselves that none of those guys were highly anticipated on the open market. Buffalo went after them because they inspired little interest around the league. And that's why we got what we paid for. They are more depth than starters. Of that group, four were regular starters, (Tripplett, Royal, Fowler, P. Price) one was benched, (Reyes) one was injured and then didn't play. (Bowen) Combined, these additions played relatively average, but not much above that. I have a feeling our additions this season mirror last season's free agent signings.
As for NC, I have to believe they'll let him go in FA. OK fine, but do we grab someone and get an above average player elsewhere? Cash to the cap ideology indicates probably otherwise.
It would not be fair to assume that, but once March 2 rolls around, we'll see just what a lot of this Press Conference really meant. They'll finally be forced to show their hand and I'm looking forward to see what they have in mind. If that involves competing, then perhaps that's not a bad thing. I think Marv has enough sense not to mortgage the farm for any one player, but who we acquire will have a sizable impact upon where our strengths are next season.
-
Nate was better in the last 8 games than the first games 8 of last season. Which Nate will show up next year for the Bills or whatever other team he lands with. If he plays like he did in his last 8, he'll be dominant and earn the big bucks that he's demanding.
I'm not suggesting that he'll ever turn into a super-dud free agent like SS Adam Archuleta did for the Redskins, but Nate will have to bring his A-game to every game to justify his signing bonus and contract dollars.
Yeah, I totally agree, if the guy's going to get paid, then he's going to need to play outstanding football all the time.
IF Losman and Evans continue to develop, I'll be very interested if we offer them what the market calls for. WR for one is a position that has been particularly lean in free agency both this year and last. CB is that way this year. There are some positions you cannot afford to be cheap in. Having a premier LT and QB make things a lot easier. On defense, MLB and 2-3 guys at the DT and DE make things all the better. Still, it's comforting to know a guy can be left alone in coverage. We've got young safeties who despite playing well this year are still young. They'll progress, but having experienced CB's make up for a lot of their mistakes.
I truly don't see us signing NC. If so, who replaces him? Free Agency might provide the answer, but I see guys leaving and I'm afraid their replacements won't be their equal. I see why F-B doesn't fit the system and why Kelsay might be expendable with Hargrove and Denney capable of stepping in. I sure hope Youboty is ready to play or we devote another resource (FA signing and/or draft pick) to shoring up CB position. Nate leaving is not a good thing, no matter which way you spin it. You cannot lose three defensive starters and maintain the same level of play.
I'm glad Coy Wire is happy with the atmosphere. Hopefully, that'll be a bargaining point in getting guys to come to Buffalo. I don't think there are many people who feel about DJ the way players think about Tom Coughlin. You can't treat pros like that and have good chemistry.
-
If Henry Jones comes back for the NFL Veteran Minumum (for 10+ yrs svc) we could move Whitner to CB and then be set in the defensive backfield.
-
Marv said they're not going to get into a bidding war with other teams over free agents. Read what you want out of that, it effectively limits which players we have a realistic chance of getting.
-
It seems the Bills are re-defining the role of General Manager. Okay, no problem. Then again, what exactly does Marv do? We know he's not a salary cap whiz or involved with contract negotiations.
The Buffalo News article says his sole responsibility is dealing with personnel issues. But he didn't know McGahee announced to the football world through a shady magazine that Buffalo should move to Toronto. And recently he has begun to get more interested in scouting and such.
Earlier this month the front office admitted they hadn't contacted Clements and his agent. I guess they were too busy signing Kirk Chambers and Coy Wire.
The article continues, "Levy has gotten more involved in scouting. He likes studying college prospects and being a part of the evaluation process." If he's just getting on board with scouting, who made the call last year on those free agents and draft picks we signed?
I wish people would stop giving this organization a free pass just because Marv is on board. Marv does not control the money supply. Let's start thinking realistically. The owner has laid down the gauntlet, financially speaking of course. Marv will need to work miracles with our limited budget to make this team even respectable. We're not going to amortize our future, but ask yourself what is the future? The General Manager will need super-human efforts out of his coaching and scouting departments to come up with talent that can fill the positions we're going to lose each season to free agency. I'd like to give Marv the benefit of the doubt, but the PC left more questions in my mind. Come March 2, answers (i.e. players) will begin to be supplied. And those answers won't be what Bills fans want.
Pessimistic assessment, not really. But realistic, yes.
-
Cash to the Cap seems like Ralph's way to fight the large bonuses teams are giving out as a way of attracting players.
I think Tripplett received the largest bonus last year, and it was 5.5M. I could be mistaken, but not using large signing bonuses probably translates into restricting the front office from getting better players in here.
DeLuca, your scenario takes place after we fail to get better players in here and finish the coming season out of the playoffs. At which point will Bills fans allow their better players to leave because they want a bonus and see their replacements as cheaper, less talented players?
-
Free Agency 2007 is less than 2 weeks away and Friday Buffalo laid out their plan for how they intend to conduct it. To date we've heard a lot of talk with no big decisions having been made. Eventually, they'll need to commit to someone and spend money. Let's wait and see who they pursue in free agency before we rant against the front office.
I'm not going to speculate on what players the front office wants to or will get. IMO, if the 2007 Free Agency period is like most other years, the quality, high end free agents will be signed before the first week is over.
You will know where this team aims to go after that week is over. Should we stand by and pick up the average free agents again, don't expect much. The NFL may be a watered down product, but you must maintain some talent in order to remain competitive. Losing three quality players from your defense and replacing them with lesser talented players does not make us better. Especially when that defense was ranked near the bottom in most categories
If Marv doesn't have much faith in rookies contributing, and I think many of ours played last season out of pure necessity, free agency will be our way to replace and improve. If we go after more moderately priced players, be prepared to expect less.
-
I'd like to say that comparing the NFL to an NHL, MLB, or English Premier League team for that matter shouldn't carry weight. The NFL is the only league where teams share the multi-billion dollar tv deal the league has with the networks. It's safe to say Ralph will be getting something in the neighborhood of 105M this year. Which small markets in the aforementioned leagues get that? None of them.
Spending doesn't equal titles. But when I looked at what Indy had to spend for 07 as of right now, I believe the figure is 200K. Spending wisely might not equal titles, but it sure goes a long way to being successful.
All we'd like to see is the playoffs in Buffalo for the Bills. Sabres fans are seeing that, why can't Bills fans if money is spent right.
-
Did you watch the Bills this year?
Did you happen to see Nate break up that third down pass to Andre Johnson on the last Houston posession after Jauron punted the ball away with like 2:30 left on the clock and needing a TD yet to win? Ya' think Philadelphia could have used a player to step up like that after Andy Reid punted the ball away late in Philly's loss to New Orleans in the playoffs? But Jauron came out smelling like a rose and JP had his signature moment, courtesy of a play nobody on that team makes, except Clements.
And that's just the beginning. The Indy game? Dominated by Nate. The Jets game? If Clements doesn't take that ball to the house, the Bills were in trouble. It was slipping away while Willis nursed his hangover, err, stomach ailment, on the bench. Hell, if they had matched Clements on Gates in the SD game like the Bills once did with Antoine Winfield on Tony Gonzalez, the Bills win that home game, IMO. Instead, Gates made the #8 pick in the 2006 draft look like a 5'9" stong safety trying to cover a premier TE. And of course, who could forget Nate breaking up that ill advised pass from the 1 yard line into the endzone that floated into Ko Simpsons' arms, snatching victory from the jaws of defeat against Green Bay.
Anyone?
7-9 with a near miss against the SB champs sure looks a lot better than 5-11 or 4-12 doesn't it? If Nate wasn't out there, what is the perception of this "up and coming" team going into next season? Are we looking to draft a QB with that top 5 pick? Are we railing against Ralph for hiring a washed up old coach to be GM and a retread HC with an increasingly more dismal record? Ask Mike Mularkey how stupid not having Pat Williams in the lineup made him look coming off a 9-7 season.
So you can sit there and say Nate isn't worth as much cap space as 3 vital cogs like Larry Triplett, Tutan Reyes and Andre Davis combined, but I will differ on that.
This whole post is right on. We've already begun rationalizing why it's okay to let NC go. He's gonna demand too much money, he doesn't play an important enough position in the Cover-2, etc, etc... We're talking about having 33M in cap room and not able to sign our own? We've cried this small market thing long enough. Nate was a very valuable player in Buffalo this season. He made game-changing plays that contributed to wins. 7-9 could easily become 5-11 and then our front office doesn't look so good. And don't forget what a corner can allow to happen. Roy Williams dominated Terrence McGee in the Detroit game until Clements came over. By then it was too late. But I forgot, CB's aren't worth much in the Cover-2.
Buffalo is a laughing stock to the rest of the NFL. Sorry to be a doom and gloom person, but a lot of people said 7-9 was more than they expected. I myself saw them going 5-11 with the influx of multiple players, coaches, and a new GM coming in. But what if we took a step back next season? What if 5-11 happened again? This is a league in which the Jets and Ravens had 2006 seasons where they won 6 and 7 games more respectively than 2005. Why can't we do that with some new above-average players?
The fans are tired of mediocre. Last year I thought they'd do something to make the team more attractive above and beyond the free agent finds like Tripplett, Royal, Fowler, Bowen, P. Price, etc. NC would go a long way into making people believe the Bills were in it for this year. Now, I don't think so. I think they're going to be rebuilding until doomsday or they leave for greener pastures.
-
This is from another board, but it applies to the Bills approach to building their team. Note that Bills will follow the Colts allocation of value to the CB position & DL positions. I would guess the Bills re-sign Kelsey but not break the bank for Nate.
"Strikes me that some of the most successful NFL franchises are employing similar models to sustain competitiveness in the salary cap era. By following a specific business model they can avoid the "bust" that follows the "boom" for other teams and be consistently competitiveness.
This trend is most noticeable in the Patriots, Colts and Steelers.
i) Pay your studs.
Whether it's Manning, Harrison and Wayne for the Colts or Brady, Seymour and Wilfork for the Patriots, the principle is the same: pay your studs.
BUT it's not that simple. The top franchises only pay top $$$ at positions they deem the most important - usually QB and DL. That means they must refuse to overpay at positions they don't consider so important - LB for the Colts and Steelers (who frequently let LBs go in FA), WR for the Patriots and Steelers too
ii) Coach up cheap overachievers at other positions
If you're paying top $$$ at certain positions, then you won't have much money to go around at others. The trick is to employ a coaching strategy that enables you to use guys other teams don't want successfully and to maximise coaching effectiveness.
For example, Indy uses the Cover 2 and doesn't mind if their CBs are short.
Pittsburgh uses DE/OLB tweeners in its 3-4 because other teams wouldn't use them.
New England and Indy both pick up overachieving physically limited types on the OL and coach them into being solid players.
iii) Employ specific role players as your depth players
Guys like Polian and Pioli pick up depth players with potential to play very specific roles. For example, Indy uses receiving TEs like Bryan Fletcher in its offensive scheme very successfully. New England is always apparently able to turn backups into competent starters when injury strikes.
iv) Be ruthless when Father Time approaches
All these franchise refuse to pay $$$ to older players. That having been said, they are smart at picking up former greats for the veteran minimum if no-one else wants them.
v) Consistency, consistency, consistency
All these franchises have a philosophy they stick to with their coaching regardless of personnel. It means that they can pick players very precisely who "work" in their scheme - for example, speed DEs for Indy, pass-rush OLBs for Pittsburgh, possession WRs for New England"
There's only one problem with this scenario of using these teams as an example.
Belichick, Dungy, and Cowher (when he coached in PIT) were superior coaches with plenty of NFL success. DJ is a nice guy but his career record demonstrates that he's a middle of the road coach. That's fact not speculation. Our coaching staff must prove they can turn below average players into average and average players into above average. Right now I'm not seeing it but perhaps that changes. Just working hard in the off-season though can't replace talent. Everyone knows that some guys aren't going to be average or above average no matter how hard they work. BTW, who are cheap overachievers on this team? And when those overachievers overachieve, aren't they going to want to become paid overachievers? This scenario demands you draft well every year and doesn't allow for any mistakes, especially in Rounds 1-3.
Secondly, NE, IND, and PIT keep most of their big guys. We are proving that we won't because they play the wrong positions and probably will cost too much. Which positions does our team require? If Evans has another outstanding season, is he worthy of a big contract? That's hypothetical but will some make an argument that there are only 1-2 positons absolutely important? One is LT but where are the others?
The writing is on the wall after yesterday. Whether you choose to interpret it or ignore it, be prepared for a model that allows us to remain consistently mediocre. For those who have short memories, we haven't had a playoff win since the 95 season. Those teams you've mentioned have all won Super Bowls in the last 3. There's a huge difference. Our version of what NE, IND, and PIT do will be similar, just with less money to spend. It's absurd to think we can do what NE does. They have Belichick as HC and Pioli as GM. Those guys run circles around Marv and Dick for fun.
Free Agency and the Cap era have been around since 1993. Teams are adjusting to the cap and trying to be good each year rather than great for 1 or 2. I understand that. However, we haven't been anything but bad for a while. 7-9 isn't horrendous if you're coming off 10-6. But our last few seasons before 2006 were: 5-11, 9-7, 6-10, 8-8 and 3-13.
That's not all Marv's fault. I think Pioli and Polian are All-Pro GM's and Marv, well some have their opinions. The one constant has been Ralph. And he hasn't made the team better, bottom freakin line. And now we're being told to prepare for less. Why can't we spend like 31 other teams will?
-
Why do the optimists out there think cash to the cap is a good thing? What's good about it? This cash to the cap approach is further restrictions on our ability to get better players in here. The NFL is changing and we're not changing with it because our geriatric owner gives his personnel people financial limitations. If Marv said 30M is what we have left, that's not much. Our top pick will get their bonus and pay and now we're down even more from that 30M. Last year the Bills paid so little in salary compared with other teams around the leauge, I wondered if they were saving up for another season. Now I see that's not the case.
Don't be misled by cash to the cap. All it means is we're going to play with less than the other boys. You can talk all you want about how last years draft picks are going to start and how there's another draft coming up and we haven't started free agency. But...we've just limited ourselves voluntarily by saying we've got 30M to use as opposed to what the NFL says we have.
-
For all those optimists out there: Which other teams are restricting their front office with this cash to the cap idea? And are those teams close to being playoff-bound? Because we just did. Read into this PC what you'd like, our ability to import talent took an uppercut to the jaw when we decided the NFL's financial limits weren't strict enough for us. Cash to the cap is a term that translates into spend less.
-
I have to admit Marv Levy is a very nice and thoughtful man. A HOF coach and someone who guided the Bills into many successful seasons. But being nice in the NFL will not get you ahead, certainly as General Manager. The franchise tag is there for a reason to protect us in a case such as this. NC wants to get paid, and we are in the drivers seat right now to do it.
While his cap knowledge is either lower than expected or he simply is joking, one thing is certain: other teams will maintain their free agents while we appear set to lose ours. We've talked on this board about keeping our own and drafting well. We'd better draft well because we're not going to retain those picks who become stars. A cycle of replacing our own continues.
So many are already rationalizing Nate's departure. The only logical rationale I have is if someone makes a totally ridiculous offer w/a 25m signing bonus and 9M per or close to it. If we are close in terms of a deal, I think Nate remains. If we don't, we'd better make an effort to keep him because there's no one to replace him.
-
But if we lose both of them AND let Kelsay walk I will not feel good about being a fan of this franchise.
Unless of course we bring in a BIG NAME DE to replace him.
But between our cap-room and needing some continuity within the player personell AND the fact that we wont find anyone at his level any cheaper anyways... he better be a Bill next year.
Agreed. How does a 7-9 team improve enough to make the playoffs and still lose those guys? Reality says you don't lose starters and then replace all of them from within. I don't care who you are, most teams don't get big time production from their 4th-7th round selections. I'd say of our 4th-7th round picks from last year, one or two guys might become legit NFL starters. All of them becoming starters is wishful thinking. Those players combined with lower priced FA's and the 07 draft class still doesn't make up for the loss of established NFL veteran starters.
-
The rest of the 2007 Off-season.
1. We'll try the RFA game again and maybe get a young player with potential. Or we head back to the dugout with bat in hands.
2. Free Agency will provide "depth" and give us more career backups, some perhaps in starting roles.
3. The draft will offer a surprise, meaning our most glaring weaknesses (G and DT) will not receive attention until late when it doesn't matter much.
4. The PR department will be in high gear, spinning this team as someone to watch out for and gunning for the playoffs.
5. Our cap hit will come in around the league minimum and our low end free agent acquisitions will be overpaid to get us there. This is similar to 2006 when we got Fowler (a career backup prior to Matt Birk's injury) Royal (2.5M per for a guy the skins didn't care for) Tutan Reyes (no comment necessary) and Matt Bowen (was anyone interested in this guy other than CFL teams?)
As for the Saints mention from last year, please don't make that comparison. Drew Brees was a question mark, but anyone who thinks we have a QB with Brees' talent is off their rocker. We also don't have Deuce McAllister or selected a Reggie Bush like talent. Two different teams here. One spends and the other one complains about having to spend.
Sorry for my pessimism...there is nothing to suggest we're in it to win it. 8-8 here we come!
-
I realize which positions are at a premium here in the Cover 2. You've got to have those 2 DT's who can take on blockers and stop the run while getting interior pressure. The DE's have to combine with them to place pressure on the opposing QB. Your MLB has to be a great tackler and drop into coverage on pass plays, hence the interceptions F-B and Urlacher made last season. That I completely understand.
Corner may not be the most valuable position in this scheme, but letting a guy go purely because he's not demanded to do great things is not the right logic to use. He is indeed one of our own free agents, and losing him tells me that the front office isn't keen on OUR free agents unless they come at the right price. That I believe is under 5M per.
I don't see how this defense can afford to lose Clements, F-B, and to a much lesser degree, Kelsay, without adding an established NFL vet who has played at a high level and still expects to stop opponents. Let's all remember that WITH these guys our defense was atrocious against the run and teams didn't throw the ball as much against us because we were so bad on run defense.
My question remains: who are we going to replace these guys with to make our defense more stout? If we're going to get better for this season, because the fans are impatient after 7 losing ones, drafting and low quality free agent signings like last year aren't going to do it. Maybe in 2 years or so, but I don't think anyone wants to hear that.
-
I'm tired of hearing this argument about re-signing a player because the system doesn't demand a star at the position. Just which positions do we need above-average players in the Cover 2? Are there any? Can we have a bunch of below average or average players make this thing work?
When Clements and F-B leave are we going to make up for the loss in the defense with capable players or cast-offs because a given position doesn't require great players? I think we're already starting to see many fans rationalize letting NC walk because "his position doesn't demand a big time playmaker" in our defensive scheme. If Nate leaves because his demands are ridiculous (see wanting close to Champ money or more) well OK. But I expect the front office to then spend on 1 or 2 above average players to compensate for his loss. If the market allows us to retain NC for a reasonable price and I'm not sure on what that is, we have to.
We already know the front 7 has to apply pressure for this Cover 2 to work. Containing the run starts with capable DT's and a MLB who makes tackles. If we don't have that, and we don't as of right now, where does that leave the secondary without above average CB's? Hung out to dry is what I think. Ask Terrence McGee about Detroit's Roy Williams.
-
It seems to me they're going to do things a little out of the ordinary to bring in younger players who may or may not have talent. Hargrove was the first real player they got in here who was an impending RFA.
I just don't think it's worth it to try at some of these guys, although when you've got a guy who has been in the league for a few years, you know better what you've got in them better than you would a 3rd, 4th, or 5th round pick.
-
Reading about those RFA's on the Bills website got me thinking. We know big name UFA's will always get their money because they have performed at a high level. Unless the team spends big in free agency (unlikely at this point) RFA's and lesser priced UFA's remain the Bills best means for stocking the team besides the draft.
Going after RFA's who might have potential but are buried on another team's depth chart at first seems like a smart thing to do. Of course there's no guarantee and most of them are former 3rd round or lower picks who aren't established players. Last year Buffalo pursued OT Reggie Wells from Arizona and DT Israel Idonije from Chicago. I've got to believe they've identified other RFA's that can be had for less than some UFA's and in exchange for low round picks.
What I'd like to know is do people view this as another cheap-out by the front office or something the Bills are ahead of compared to the rest of the NFL?
IMO, I'm not sold on devoting too much time to these guys. There's some cheap young talent available, but it seems more like mining for gold than a reliable way to improve the team. Hargrove hopefully is the exception, but if we don't acquire some established talent soon, we're looking at 7-9 or 8-8 again.
-
It'd be great if we could turn back the clock to 1990 and have stars or above average talent at every position, the NFL has removed teams from assembling too much talent.
In that light, you can have all the big name talent at QB, WR, and RB, but without a good OL, the offense grounds to a halt. The same can be said for the defensive side of the ball. A good front four makes the rest of the D look better. Even if the LB's and DB's aren't stars you can get away with it most of the time.
I only wish we'd seriously attempt to reubild the O-line in Buffalo. Jason Peters is one step, now lets see if they plan on taking about 3 more on the OL. Draft picks might be good in 2-3 years, but to improve now the front office needs to spend some money to let JP, Lee, and heck, even Willis make some plays.
-
I think this topic is great, if it weren't for the reality that we aren't going to sign a top free agent this season. If we were going after someone, I'd like to see Kris Dielman from SD come here. Someone who can keep DT's off the line of scrimmage and open running lanes for whomever plays RB.
Kyle Williams
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Kyle Williams is definitely strong, a hard worker, and willing to learn. At what point is that not enough? The NFL requires a player to have great upside or potential. Just working hard is not enough. Call that negative, but there have been several players who weren't NFL caliber players, despite a great work ethic. Hopefully, whomever they start at DT can prevent the run enough to get teams throwing more into the teeth of the Cover-2. When that happens, I believe you'll see a much improved defense as long as the pass D doesn't suffer a severe drop-off. Whether Williams can do that for us remains to be seen.
If anything, the SB XLI demonstrated Cover-2 teams can become contenders with glaring deficiencies in their defense. Indy stepped it up in the playoffs, having only added McFarland during the season. Though they lost Corey Simon to illness early this past season, the Colts forced teams to throw a little in the playoffs and I believe that's where the Cover-2 is at it's best. The secret to dissecting it is the ability to run. When teams can control the ball enough, they have a better shot of defeating the Cover 2.
That said, it's my opinion that DT's must possess sufficient explosiveness to exploit interior O-Lineman in run and pass defense. Size isn't as important given as evidenced by Indy and Chicago playing with 300 lb DT's.