SuperKillerRobots

Butler payed a full season in his second year I think - he at least played more than 10 games that year. I think they give D. Bell and Jamon Meredith a look and possibly re-sign Scott, but they have to get someone in to compete. I wouldn't mind if one of those two WON the starting job, but I would not like it if one of them was handed it. This Butler retirement really creates a problem because he was a player that might not have been amazing, but played with a mean streak, was strong, smart, and looked like a good candidate for vetern leader next year.

This is the most important thing to keep in mind in this situation. Also, even though this violates many of our rights, it's actually not far off from what the government can do under the Patriot Act. It's just creepy when it's done on sucha small scale though.

Together they'll be worth "hundreds of thousands".

The real question is if the Bills won 9 or 10 games in 2010, would you still hate the Gailey hire? If you said no, then let's wait on the second guessing until something happens.

Definitely agree on the 15 to 20 lbs, but he could do it and would definitely offer good pass rushing depth fromt eh DE position.

I think they might have cleared up $2.75 in cap space that doesn't matter in an uncapped year. To say that cutting 7 players, 4 of whom weren't on last season's roster, is going to turn the corner for this franchise is insane. Maybe the fact that you think letting these guys go will make a difference for the team's play next year is a signal you have become accustomed to mediocrity. It's going to take more than new nails to get this orca to win the beauty pageant. Also, I'd bet three of them are signed by new teams by the first week of mini camps. It's interesting that you are saying these guys need to go from the ST unit that was a bit of a disaster last year, but all you point out are the return issues. None of these guys return kicks - their main value is on the coverage team. I don't think the Bills' practice of having players make the team for solely their ST expertise is unique to the Bills - every team does it. If your 5th best safety is playing, you probably aren't getting very good production out of him anyways, unless you invested top 100 picks in every position - depth and starter - on the team. Your 5th S and 6th and 7th LBs shouldn't see the field often enough to make a big difference one way or another. I think the biggest reason these players were let go is because Nix probably has a different opinion on where you have ST players on the depth chart. Last year it seemed like we liked the TEs, S, CBs, WRs, and LBs (to a smaller extent), whereas I'll bet this year they focus more on LBs and TEs primarily as STers (because that's where I think the extra roster spots are going to go. We're not carrying 7 WRs this year. Also, the Giants played a 4-3 defense the year they won the SB and Mitchell was on a one year deal playing outside LB and happened to turn into a decent blitzer that season. I can't understand why you would want to get rid of the one legitimate pass rusher on the team in Schobel or Whitner or Parish before the new staff has a chance to look at them in mini or training camp- unless you get blown away with a trade offer.

The funny part is, you just listed (outside of Stupar) the players I think are msot likely to be back for training camp. Reed is FA, but the Bills hried hi scollege position coach and we are in need of depth at WR, so he could come back. Denney, also a FA, would probably be better suited to play 3-4 end than any other position he has played for us before - might replace Kelsey. Eillison and Youboty are both RFAs (assumiong no new CBA) and will most likely be tendered at least at the "draft pick" compensation level (meaning if another team signs them to an offer sheet, they have to give up their pick in the round we drafted that player originally). Youboty makes the most sense to tender because he was a 3rd rounder and might actually attract some interest, which could net us a pick. Eillison to a lesser extent.

I liked Fine, but it never seemed to click for him. He kept getting hurt and seemed to be more of a thumper than anything else. Never seemed to understand the nouances of catching the ball.

Maybe he would have been more effective if he showed up on time. Either way, I think he could have beaten out one of the bottom 8 guys on the roster. He was a pretty good STer.

Everytime I think about Jeff Garcia and the Buffalo Bills, all that comes to mind is that last good defense we had and how it looked like at the time they ended his career. Garcia looked so out of place in that game and was brutalized. As far as Garcia-to-Buffalo goes, I'd rather have Pennington.

The biggest change was swapping out Dick for Nix. I'd think DJ had most of the personnel power while he was here. If it was a committee, he led it. I do agree though, I would have liked them to interview some more people for it - from outside the organization - but I don't not like the Nix hire. Also, if RW's "meddling" was the problem, maybe the promotion of Brandon was the perfect step. Now he is in the perfect position to buffer the "football guys" from RW, so they can do their jobs. If this new regime works out over the next few years, I'll bet Brandon gets most of the credit for making it happen.

I think we need impact players, not necessarily to just fill holes with whoever is on the board. Assuming McClain was one of the four or five guys in the draft that were potentially dominant players with little risk (I've heard this said before, not making it up on my own), then he should be the pick if he's there at 9. In fact any of those four or five players should be the pick at 9. Not to beat a dead horse, but it's kind of like the Whitner selection. They could have had Ngata, but felt they needed a safety more (the probably did, since they didn't even have a stop-gap guy after Milloy was cut, but they did sign Tripplet). This time I'd just like to see them take a player that's going to be awesome and build around him to a certain extent.

I've actually been thinking that they might try to keep Kelsey for when they go with 4 linemen (as they said they would in passing situations). He's a little over-paid for a starting DE, but he did do a good job last season under Sanders and hopefully can continue that. the only real way I see him leaving is if he is absolutely worthless in the new system or they can trade him. I can't see him being bad enough to warrant being released outright.

That may be true, but at the rate the Buffalo Niagara Region is going by that time if still in the area, they'll bearly make enough to pay taxes in the first place. Our real hope is that this global warming thing works out so that Buffalo turns into the new Florida - on fresh water of course.

That's the key part of your statement right there. Chan Gailey and Buddy Nix don't care what you think or see.

That's a good call.

It was at least 65.

So he's a bad owner because he wiffed on two or three (depending how you call it) hires over the past decade? The Lions have never even been to the SB and have been owned by the same people. Are they even worse than Al and Ralph now? At least Ralph had the sense to call a spade a spade and voted against the last labor agreement, which is the basic cause of the probable work stoppage in 2011.

The author brings up some good points about how Ralph could go out of his way to help the community. That being said, Ralph isn't from Buffalo, so how much committment to the city does he have to have? Is he a bad person because he doesn't donate money to our charities or come out in support of the city? He is right about the economy. To me the Toronto experiment looks like he stole $75mm from Rogers Communications. That's a business deal done by a good businessman. He had to bridge the gap until a new labor agreement could be worked out.

Incognito is still owned by the Bills assuming that no new CBA is signed prior to the beginning of March, since he's only been in the league four years, he's an RFA. Also, Miami did place a waiver claim on him after he was let go by St Louis, but since we were worse off as a team, we got him instead of them. I could see them trying to get Thigpen simply because they may not want to use the high pick on a QB this year and/or feel that they want to see what they have currently on the roster with some added competition.

That's true, but in the spirit of being one player away, if they had a big guard to run behind, could they have picked up that 3rd and 1 with Mike Hart?

Not only that, but he should be beaten by former, more successful Bills players until he can out-do them on the football field. Somebody get the Biscut.

To the point brought up by the OP, I've actually had the thought in the back of my mind that Polian's biggest shortcoming was his inability or reluctance to get a near dominanty team over the top. Almost reminds me of Darcy Regier in that way - puts it together 95% of the way, but can't make those fine adjustments to get the seperation. Indy has been basically the same for the past ten years. WRs have come and gone and they have brought the new ones up to speed, but they have never had anything close to a dominant defense, nor even a defense that can wear teams down. They also still have problems along the oline (smallish type players), which hasn't been addressed. They keep resigning these players in the name of continuity and in most cases it works out, but they never seem to pull off the move that improves the team by leaps and bounds. They could use a few interior linemen on offense and some upgrades to their DTs and LBs (maybe a CB?). They do draft well, but it seems like most of the time they are a play or player short. I guess you could chaulk it up to coaching (i.e. a better coach will get those guys into shape), but I feel like other teams that win big games aren't affraid to make some changes in the offseason in hopes that you can get over the hump. Something like the Pats getting Moss.

I agree with what you're saying, but I think it's a chicken and the egg arguement. Can you have a good QB without any supporting cast? If so, will he be identified as a good QB against a backdrop of low talent players? These are the central questions to this arguement because if you think you can have a good QB lead your team without any supporting cast, then it stands to reason that you would want the best possible option at QB immediately, so you will get better. If however you believe that you need a team around the QB or else he will be no better than what we have had since Kelly, then you would like to see some sort of a stop gap at QB this year and a build up of the lines and defensive front 7 this year. I am in the latter group. I'm fine with getting a QB this year, so long as it's not detrimental the long term build. Basically I'd rather them draft a LT and some front 7 players this year and sort out what we have under a new coach and philosophy. Make a strong play for a QB next offseason.