SuperKillerRobots

Peter King even said in the article that he didn't think McNabb was a first-tier QB. I would be hard-pressed to agree that he is in the top 12.

I would guess that if that we're the asking price, he would have been traded somewhere. I'll bet they want something ridiculous for him at this time. There's also probably the issue of the team trading for him wanting him to sign an extension and he may not want to do that with the teams interested in trading for him. King makes a good point bringing up those team's need for QBs, but you have to think that there is a reason no one has pulled the trigger so far. Also, does he have four or five football seasons left in him or does he have four or five more years? Because with the near certain lockout looming, teams may be thinking about how a 34 year old QB will look after a year of no football. Maybe he lets himself go and is worthless after the lockout. It's not like we're talking about Jay Cutler who is going to play football fr the next 10 years. This guy could potentially call it quits at any time.

You're right. No need to get over-the-hill guys to impede the development of the young players already on the roster.

I don't think that you can say not signing FAs is equivalent to giving up on the season. Miami didn't make any huge signings after they went 1-15 and went on to win the division the next year. Atlanta didn't either - they drafted a QB. The Jets did pick up a few FAs (and a QB via the draft), but you have to wonder if Ryan's defense was the biggest reason for the turnaround, not necessarily the FAs. If you look at last year, I think we can all agree that the coaching was terrible. It's entirely possible that a potentially more competent coaching staff gets more out of the players we already have. I expect the offense to get better by just having a more coordinated attack run by a more experienced play-caller. The defense will most likely have some trouble, but I do expect them to be more of a big play defense. They'll probably still not be in the top half against the run (probably somewhere between 20 and 32), but I think they'll do better in sacks and picks. I also expect them to give up more in the red zone. To me the idea of not bringing in FAs for the sake of bringing in FAs is a good one for them now. They have a good number of young players that need real, year-long chances to see what they can do. Players like Hardy, S Johnson, McKelvin, Wood, Levitre, D Bell, J Merideth, S Nelson, Lynch, Maybin, Bryd, and even to a lesser extent D Whitner, Parish, Edwards, Brohm, Poz need an opportunity to show what they can do as featured players. That being said, if there were a LT, NT, or QB that looked like a solid piece to build around I would hope they'd go after them. I just don't see any players like that in FA this year. Dansby was the only player I was marginally hoping they'd target, but even then I don't know that he was worth it to us. We have the potential to be relatively strong at ILB. I do expect that they'll sign depth players later in the process though.

Nix was in SD those years. Unless I'm mistaken, he'll be the one pulling the trigger in this upcoming draft - for the first time in his career too.

All the teams on that list were pretty terrible last year with the exception of SD and AZ, but SD has most of their star players up for contracts and AZ lost Warner's salary. At least the Bills don't have a high payroll and poor team like Washington. For anyone saying Ralph is cheap an doesn't want to win, what do you say about the Pats* ex-golden boy in KC nearly $20mm below us? Maybe spending like crazy doesn't guarantee success?

Hate to say it, but I think they coaching staff will give D Bell a long look at LT before the draft and into training camp.

I don't understand the fascination with FA as a fix-all for bad teams. FA is usually only successful when when teams have a vet presence to indoctrinate the new players with the culture of the team. FA seems to be more of a mechanism to add pieces than it does to create. God teams create a team through the draft or key trades (less likely). Outside of Brees going to NO, it's hard to find other examples of players coming to new teams and making them great or good. And how often do franchise QBs switch teams?

If the defense is good next year it's going to be the result of the depth. I think your lineup is probably what they'll start with in the 3-4 alignment, but expect them to use a 4-2-5, 3-3-5, and/or 3-2-6 in nickle/dime situations. They can also run a modified 4-3/1-gap 3-4 in certain situations. Because of the potential for variant formations, I expect them to draft a NT that is more scheme versatile than Cody (but I wouldn't count him out because of all the other types of players they have - just not early in the draft). The real potential is in the ability to show the multiple looks with personal that actually fits that look. This could equate to us having "two defenses". My best guess on the front 7 personnel for each formation is this (starters listed on left, with primary backups following): Base 3-4 DE: Stroud, Kelsey NT: draftee NT, K Williams, Kennedy DE: Kennedy, S Johnson OLB: Maybin, Schobel, Kelsey ILB: Poz, rookie/FA LB#2, Ellison ILB: MItchell, rookie/FA LB#2, Ellison OLB: rookie/FA LB#1, Schobel, Kelsey 4-2 DE: Schobel, Maybin DT: Stroud, S Johnson, NT DT: Williams, Kennedy DE: Maybin, Kelsey LB: Ellison, Mitchell LB: Poz, rookie/FA LB#2 4-3 DE: Schobel, Maybin DT: Stroud, NT, S Johnson DT: Williams, Kennedy DE: Kelsey, Maybin OLB: Mitchell, Ellison MLB: Poz, rookie/FA LB#2 OLB: rookie/FA LB#1, Maybin 1-Gap 3-4 DE: Stroud, Kennedy NT: Williams, NT DE: Kelsey, S Johnson OLB: rookie LB#1, Schobel ILB: Poz, rookie LB#2, Ellison ILB: Mitchell, Ellison, rookie LB #2 OLB: Kelsey, Maybin 3-3 DE: Kennedy, Stroud NT: Williams, Kennedy, NT DE: Kelsey, S Johnson OLB: Schobel, Maybin, rookie LB#1 ILB: Poz, Mitchell, rookie LB#2 ILB: Ellison, Mitchell 3-2 DE: Kennedy, Stroud NT: Williams, Kennedy, NT DE: Kelsey, S Johnson LB: Poz, Mitchell, rookie LB#2 LB: Ellison, Mitchell, rookie LB#2 I think the rookie LB#1 will be a pass rusher drafted this year, rookie/FA LB#2 will be a Larry Foote type, and assuming that the NT will be a Cody-esq player (only a NT, not three tech option). The beauty is that they have the guys to get after the QB and potential to stop the run with the new NT and hopefully some bigger LBs. Obviously this is just speculation on my part, but it does include all the primary players we have now and are likely to get and to a certain extent would account fr why they seem to be keeping a lot of these players most people think are a poor fit for a solely 2-gap 3-4 defense.

The NV attorney probably isn't licensed to practice in GA. You have to pass the bar in each state to practice with only a few exceptions.

So you're worried about the 4 backup players and TO that we lost? I liked Cogs, but if they let him go, they must feel 1. Wood is doing better and 2. they want a vetern backup on the interior instead of a potential headcase or rookie there. Denney was a backup and it would have been debatable if he had a place as a reserve on the new defense let alone make any impact. Wendley (I think you mean Wendling) obviously was such an impact player and will be so missed come the first game that people in the stands will be chanting "Wend-ley, Wend-ley!" Josh Reed would have been a nice option to keep, but they have two young receivers that they need to evaluate, so he goes. TO is basically gone for the same reason as Reed - younger talent that needs to be given a chance. These five guys can be replaced with UDFAs and one FA vet signed a week or two before the draft. I'd rather see them sign a 5 tech DE to start or rotate heavily, but I expect that to happen later in FA. As Darth said previously, there isn't anyone worth it on the market this year.

You're right - Washington has made big moves for years and they are terrible. Indy makes almost no moves every year and is a perennial winner. I can only remember one big move the Pats made in the past few years and they haven't won a SB since.

The rule is that when you sign and RFA, you have to give up YOUR pick in the round he was tendered for. Since they acquired #14 through trade, that one is not the automatic pick that gets sent. If you sign an RFA to an offer sheet, you don't have to talk to his former team at all about compensation. Marshall is way better than Boldin. If goes soemwhere else, he's not going to put up nearly the numbers he does now if he is the only major receiving target. He's not that fast annd I don't think he would consistantly draw double coverage. His value is more in a 1a-1b receiver system. He needs a pass catching TE who can stretch the field or a slot receiver who other teams have to worry about. Just look at how much his loss affected them while he was out (about zip) to see what his true value is.

So you'd be happy if there were reports of the Bills FO trying to get players? I can make up rumors for you all day, btu that doesn't mean they're going to happen. Who do you want them to sign anyways? There's only three high-profile automatic starters out there. Yeah there are some cheap DE and LB options, but I doubt you see those guys signed by anyone until the weekend or early next week.

I doubt he gets cut if not traded. By tendering him, they guarantee his salary for the year, cutting him is useless. He will either get signed by another team and we'll get some sort of compensation, or he'll play backup LB and ST for us for a year or two more. We could do a lot worse than having him be a backup for us, regardless of what anyone thinks about him.

Wrong sport

Dude, Vick would be a stopgap. I think what the original poster was talking about was which starting positions will they be unable to adequately address in FA and draft. They need a starting WR, NT, DE, OLB, QB, RT, LT, and maybe a few more. With an excellent draft, you might be able to find 3 starters. With only 3 or 4 top tier FAs out there that we might need, and none likely to come here for various reasons, a lot of the FAs signed this year are going to be stopgap players. Maybe we can get a DE to start from FA. So now we have four new starters on the team when we need 7 at least. Those three starting positions will most likely be occupied by "stopgap players" - at least in terms of how we look at them when they're signed.

It would be tough to take him with a first round pick unless it was in the 20s and we got a few extra picks out of the trade back. We need some tackles. That being said, if he's that good and would solidify the line, I'd take him, move Wood to C (once healthy), leave Levitre where he is and put Iupati at RG. You now have two high-end backups in the interior OL and hopefully would be able to put together two starting tackles from what you have (Bell and Meredith) and a draft pick and FA.

I agree, but I think you have to measure the "upgrade" at QB against giving up a solid player (as you called him) in Whitner, who is a starter. If i thought that Jason Campbell was anything more than a stopgap to another QB I would probably do it, but otherwise I would keep Whitner. I would be much more open to trading Whitner for picks or a definite upgrade at a position, not just "competition". How pissed would everyone be if we did this trade and then Edwards won the starting job in a fair competition?

I think they should give me a look - I put on 25 lbs over the past three months and now weigh in at about 208. I think I could hold my own in the trenches.

Isn't the Playgirl readership something like 75% gay men?

That's a great explanation Darth (sorry about that earlier post today). You coached and/or played? When I first read about the 3-4 after I heard we switched, it sounded a lot like a 5-2. They play the three linemen 4-0-4 and the two OLBs flank them on either side. Obviously defenses don't line up like this all the time, but it seems like a good way to disguise blitzes. Does the 3-4 basically have the same principles as the 5-2 two your talking about?

Good post - you're my new favorite poster. I've been saying we need to start hurting the other team for years.

So Darth, does Whitner have to go because he can't beat out someone for the fourth safety spot? Or does he have to go because of his off-field transgression? Is a 4th round pick going to contribute more than him? Or does he have to go because you still have an ax to grind about that pick? I think a lot of people wanted Ngata then and probably everyone would take him now (with hindsight being 20/20), but that's not a reason to release him. I don't even think his salary is that high this year.

Nothing wrong with making the opposing team fear for their manhood - makes them play tentative.