Peter King ranks the Bills

[C.Biscuit97]

Obviously, this means nothing and Peter King isn't exactly the most reliable writer in the world. I als know people are going to predict us to be bad. But this bad??? Seems dumb to me and I'd love to bet PK some $ on this. We won 6 games with no run defense and no QB. How did we get worse this offseason? Is TO really that big of a loss? I don't think so but I'll gladly take the over on the Billis win total this year.

[tonyjustbcuz]

Call me a perennial optimist, but I think King is way off.

 

For all intents and purposes, the Bills have improved from last year. Not much, but incrementally better. Shoot, by just replacing Jauron with someone else they already have won 1-2 more games in my book.

 

I agree with King, they have no one to throw the football. And unless a WR emerges outside of Evans, there won't be many options for the QB to throw the football to. But, so long as the transition to the 3-4 goes reasonably well, I can't imagine the Bills will have a worse record than last year.

 

5-11 (IMO)....Most teams that have switched from the 4-3 to the 3-4 the initial year of the change have a very difficult season and as in most cases the record is usually terrible...we're talking 1, 2, 3, 4 wins...and rarely 5 !! Being optimistic I'll say 5 with a horrific start and a strong close. This team has a lot of Gelling to do at many positions besides becoming acclimated to the coaching staff and the 3-4 defense and likely as well the offense will be different in most instances requiring a lot of class time to understand the Bill's playbook.

 

I am not sure if the Bill's have improved overall from last year. I think there are some new building blocks for the future, and some addition by subtraction, but I think some of these changes will hurt them initially. For instance, T.O. is not the longterm answer in Buffalo, but for the short-term he could help the passing game and give them a better grade at the position of WR. The Bills will benefit later for releasing T.O., but I'm not sure that they will benefit from releasing Josh Reed

who's salary was favorably structured for the Bills. I think they needed to keep Reed for a year or two more until they can fill all the holes properly at wide receiver. I think with James Hardy coming of injuries and having not shown any impact at the position previously, Roscoe Parrish being unhappy with his stature on the team and failing to provide much help except on special teams, and Stevie Johnson going from Pre-season hero to zero when it counts for real. The new roookie M. Easely is a nice read and he failed to provide anything noteworthy until the last 8 games of his senior year at a small time college. He is a high risk/high reward pick who could be released after roster cuts or could be the next Andre Reed.

But, overall there is nothing concrete at the WR position except for Lee Evans!

 

I think the Bills misdirected their draft focus regarding C.J. Spiller despite his future achievements that are likely. The Bills already have strength in the positon of Rb and desperately needed a Left Offensive Tackle. There is no reason to believe that their mid-round pick OT Wang will provide the intensity and skills that are needed at the position. Wang has the tools but has been an underachiever to date.

 

Anyways, gotta run and it wouldn't be fair to drag this out, but 5-11 give or take a game is probably about right in my estimation. But, for the record I'd much prefer to see them 11-5 and will be rooting and yelling with all my might for our

mighty Bills to kick the crap out of everyone...especially the fish, the patsies, and J e t s stupid Jets who I think may be going to the SuperBowl in a fair assesment of their stellar drafting and acquiring free agents!!! Go Billzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

[birdog1960]

And this is a tough one that I've struggled with. Sure, if we don't stand a chance at winning the SuperBowl, then why not just finish last so we can get the QB we're lacking? It makes the most sense from a purely intellectual standpoint.

based on this, we should have tried for last place in about 40 of the 50 years of the franchises existence...maybe even more.

[qwksilver]

Pretty sure PKing had the saints around 18-24 last year and they turned out just fine. He is a writer that needs to fill space every week, Sometimes he makes mistakes.

 

Didn't he also think JP would turn out to be the real thing?

[Cynical]

It's to bad Kiffen acts like a child because the guy is a really good coach. Look at what Jamarcus did with him and after he left. Jonathan Crompton was terrible QB for 3 years and Kiffen had him for a season and made him into a very solid QB who got drafted. He goes to USC and turns out the #1 recruting class including the #1 prospect in the country who had his bags packed for the U until Lane got there. I think USC wins the title in the next 2 years no doubt.

 

If the NCAA wasn't a corrupt POS that seems more intent on dragging it's feet in regards to the investigation of USC ...

[John Cocktosten]

If the NCAA wasn't a corrupt POS that seems more intent on dragging it's feet in regards to the investigation of USC ...

There are so many in the media rooting for this to happen to Kiffen. I think he's a loudmouth but he's very calculated. He did a great job at UT last year but my favorite thing he did was showing up on ESPN on college gameday during the SEC championship game. The dude has balls!

[aristocrat]

we're about 24

[GR8PRKN]

Let's see:

 

Last year, Jauron was head coach, your O-Coordinator is fired right before the season begins along with your starting LT, you're starting two rookies on the O-line at guard and an almost-rookie at LT, your line gets so beaten up that you wind up starting eleven different guys there, your receivers are the same underachieving group as always plus an AARP addition, the injury bug tears into your D at a frightening rate and your QB position is in turmoil all season long. And yet you win 6 and have at least 4 more in your hands.

 

This year: New GM, new HC and staff, including Bruce De Haven and what looks like a serious commitment in the strength department, your rookie linemen are a year older, you've drafted CJ Spiller, your HC has a well-deserved rep as a QB guru, your off-season FA signings seem, if not blockbusters then at least well-targeted and an upgrade, your defense is overhauled while returning some of your best D players, your draft (in my opinion) is one of the best you've ever had, and you just might have some very good receivers.

 

Sure, there are lots and lots of unknowns. But how in the world can a supposedly knowledgeable guy like King compare the execrable Bills of last season with the Bills of 2010 and think that they will be so much worse? To finish 31st would mean winning no more than 2 or 3 games. Really? The only way that happens is if Gailey and the players who make the roster are incredibly bad, that this whole change-of-regime is one of the worst mistakes in the history of the NFL, that every negative thing said about Nixley is true (and every positive thing is wrong).

 

Somehow, I don't think that's the case. 10-6, easy.

 

I would be happy with 8-5 going inito the afc run...

[Cotton Fitzsimmons]

#31, beating out the Rams.

 

Beerball, my good fellow, what irritates YE OLE about all of these experts consistently predicting us to finish dead last is they do it so smugly and they've been consistently wrong. We've got guys like Marshall Faulk predicting 3-13 every year and then coming back the next season and laughing at us some more while making the same lame prediction. We haven't been nearly as bad as the hype that follows us. Don't get YE wrong... we should not be happy with our current situation, but the proper term for the last decade would be "mediocre" We've consistently been in the middle third of the league. Over the last 8 seasons we average out to 7-9, not 3-13. 7-9 is a small improvement away from being in the playoffs. I'm not saying we deserve to be in the conversation with playoff contenders until we prove it, but we sure as hell should not consistently be picked to finish with the Lions, Rams, Raiders, etc. YE OLE could handle predictions of 6-10 or 7-9... that very well could be accurate, but I get the feeling guys like Peter King and Marshall Faulk truly believe that we've been the laughing stock of the league for the last decade and it's simply not true.

[Cynical]

There are so many in the media rooting for this to happen to Kiffen.

 

The media is only a small portion waiting for this to happen.

 

I think he's a loudmouth but he's very calculated.

 

Calculated? He's reckless and thinks he is untouchable. That's what happens when a coach comes from a dirty program and the NCAA seems nonchalant about enforcing "it's" rules.

 

He did a great job at UT last year but my favorite thing he did was showing up on ESPN on college gameday during the SEC championship game. The dude has balls!

 

Oh yeah, he did a great job at Tenn. It only took him one year to start violating the recruiting regulations by pimping out those girls. I wonder how much money it will cost Tenn to make that problem go away. But there are those damn pictures, and this is the internet age ...

[slyng1]

Lets see how peter did with his 2009 list (you can view that HERE)

 

#2 - Chicago - "Cutler's a big-time player, and I suspect we'll find out over the next few years if he has nerves of steel and can win the big game." ...Awesome...

 

#6 - Philly - They limped into the playoffs..

 

#10 & 11 -- Tennessee and ATL -- Tenn started what 0-6? Atlanta was a middling 9-7 and I can't remember if they made the playoffs or not...

 

#14 - Green Bay

 

#15 - Minnesotta - One of the top 3 teams last year... (to be fair, I think this ranking was done when they had Tarvaris Jackson as QB)

 

#24 - New Orleans - Won the Super Bowl

 

#28 - Cincinatti - Made the playoffs

[Thurman#1]

Call me a perennial optimist, but I think King is way off.

 

For all intents and purposes, the Bills have improved from last year. Not much, but incrementally better. Shoot, by just replacing Jauron with someone else they already have won 1-2 more games in my book.

 

I agree with King, they have no one to throw the football. And unless a WR emerges outside of Evans, there won't be many options for the QB to throw the football to. But, so long as the transition to the 3-4 goes reasonably well, I can't imagine the Bills will have a worse record than last year.

 

 

 

Well, he might be being a shade pessimistic, but not all that much. To me, your last sentence says it all ... "But, so long as the transition to the 3-4 goes reasonably well, I can't imagine the Bills will have a worse record than last year."

 

Yeah, but the thing is, that transition simply is NOT likely to go well. Not in the first year. Not with, what, four to five guys playing positions they've never played before and a rookie NT and nobody who's even close to a sure thing at being the super-athletic ROLB pass rusher, the second-most important position in the 3 - 4.

[Thurman#1]

Lets see how peter did with his 2009 list (you can view that HERE)

 

#2 - Chicago - "Cutler's a big-time player, and I suspect we'll find out over the next few years if he has nerves of steel and can win the big game." ...Awesome...

 

#6 - Philly - They limped into the playoffs..

 

#10 & 11 -- Tennessee and ATL -- Tenn started what 0-6? Atlanta was a middling 9-7 and I can't remember if they made the playoffs or not...

 

#14 - Green Bay

 

#15 - Minnesotta - One of the top 3 teams last year... (to be fair, I think this ranking was done when they had Tarvaris Jackson as QB)

 

#24 - New Orleans - Won the Super Bowl

 

#28 - Cincinatti - Made the playoffs

 

 

Yup. And let's see your list from last year. Was it better? I didn't make one but it wouldn't have been better.

 

Predicting the future perfectly is impossible in a system like this. No way to predict injuries to key players, or just simply teams under or overperforming. When you look at something like this, you don't look at it as a guarantee. Ask King about it and I'm sure he'd say it's the best possible guess I can make at this time with the available info. And he'd be very clear that he would be wrong in a few cases, he just wouldn't know which ones till after the season.

 

Look at it as a bit of fun, a piece of entertainment and something to talk about.

[iinii]

Great, he had N.O. at twenty four last season when it started. Does this mean we will move up and finish seventh?

[bonzaibills]

Beerball, my good fellow, what irritates YE OLE about all of these experts consistently predicting us to finish dead last is they do it so smugly and they've been consistently wrong. We've got guys like Marshall Faulk predicting 3-13 every year and then coming back the next season and laughing at us some more while making the same lame prediction. We haven't been nearly as bad as the hype that follows us. Don't get YE wrong... we should not be happy with our current situation, but the proper term for the last decade would be "mediocre" We've consistently been in the middle third of the league. Over the last 8 seasons we average out to 7-9, not 3-13. 7-9 is a small improvement away from being in the playoffs. I'm not saying we deserve to be in the conversation with playoff contenders until we prove it, but we sure as hell should not consistently be picked to finish with the Lions, Rams, Raiders, etc. YE OLE could handle predictions of 6-10 or 7-9... that very well could be accurate, but I get the feeling guys like Peter King and Marshall Faulk truly believe that we've been the laughing stock of the league for the last decade and it's simply not true.

 

Between 2000 and 2008, only 7 teams had a lower winning percentage than the Bills .417. Two teams haven't made the playoffs this decade, Detroit and Buffalo, and even Detroit beat the Bills last time they played. 2 of the other 6 teams "worse" than Buffalo made the playoffs last year (Cincinnati and Arizona) Another, Cleveland, has beaten the Bills 3 straight times, while Houston (31-10 in 2009) and San Francisco (10-3 in 2008) both beat us at home in the last 2 seasons. The Bills have not been mediocre. They've been just plain bad.

[Cotton Fitzsimmons]

Between 2000 and 2008, only 7 teams had a lower winning percentage than the Bills .417. Two teams haven't made the playoffs this decade, Detroit and Buffalo, and even Detroit beat the Bills last time they played. 2 of the other 6 teams "worse" than Buffalo made the playoffs last year (Cincinnati and Arizona) Another, Cleveland, has beaten the Bills 3 straight times, while Houston (31-10 in 2009) and San Francisco (10-3 in 2008) both beat us at home in the last 2 seasons. The Bills have not been mediocre. They've been just plain bad.

 

As I clearly stated, I'm not happy with the present state. But we have all these assclowns predicting that we'll win 3 or 4 games every season like clock work, when over the past 8 seasons we've been the quintessential 7-9 team. I'm not happy with 7-9, but the fact is to me that's mediocre. There's a far sight between that and 1-15, 2-14, 3-13. We talk about these over night transformations from 1-15 to 11-5, and how Chan is hopeful we can do something like that. My point is we're not nearly as far in the hole as some make it out to be. If we found a way to win 2 or 3 more games (not 10 more games) per season, even during the Jauron era, we would've made the playoffs and even possibly won the division a time or two. I'm sick of hearing prognosticators say we're going to go 3-13 and be the worst team in the NFL next year. It's not going to happen.

[eball]

Didn't take the board long to hate King again.

[Thurman#1]

As I clearly stated, I'm not happy with the present state. But we have all these assclowns predicting that we'll win 3 or 4 games every season like clock work, when over the past 8 seasons we've been the quintessential 7-9 team.

 

 

Where are all these assclowns? King predicted last year that we'd be 22nd out of 32. He slightly overestimated us. I haven't seen us consistently be predicted to be in the bottom 4. That's just what it feels like. Generally what has happened is that people have predicted us to be slightly below average. That's what people will predict, if you're slightly below average year after year.

 

However, switch to a 3 - 4 defense when your personnel don't match up with the 3 - 4 and people will predict you to have a much lower finish. For good reason. And even more so when you don't fill your two biggest needs, at QB and LT.

 

It's worth remembering that if you're below average for two or three years, that's not unusual, but if you're below average for a lot of years in a row, that will result in your being, on average, one of the worst teams over that span.

[Thurman#1]

Didn't take the board long to hate King again.

 

 

Heh heh. Wait'll he says something good about us again. Suddenly he'll be a genius.

[Thurman#1]

Lets see how peter did with his 2009 list (you can view that HERE)

 

#2 - Chicago - "Cutler's a big-time player, and I suspect we'll find out over the next few years if he has nerves of steel and can win the big game." ...Awesome...

 

#6 - Philly - They limped into the playoffs..

 

#10 & 11 -- Tennessee and ATL -- Tenn started what 0-6? Atlanta was a middling 9-7 and I can't remember if they made the playoffs or not...

 

#14 - Green Bay

 

#15 - Minnesotta - One of the top 3 teams last year... (to be fair, I think this ranking was done when they had Tarvaris Jackson as QB)

 

#24 - New Orleans - Won the Super Bowl

 

#28 - Cincinatti - Made the playoffs

 

 

As King himself said:

 

 

"So before I go out this morning, let me embarrass myself by ranking the NFL one through 32. That's not being overly modest -- just realistic. I stink at this. In fact, my recommendation if you really want to find out what's going to happen in the NFL this year is to take a bye on this column. Last year, I really distinguished myself. Picked the Bears to make the Super Bowl. Picked the Saints 24th in the league, which was a point of some contention all season, right up to the moment 30 minutes after the Saints won the Super Bowl and Sean Payton walked up to his podium to meet the press after the game, saw me, and said: 'Not bad for number 24.'

 

"But I press on -- stupidly or intrepidly, not sure which, keeping one statistic in mind. Twelve teams make the playoffs each year. In the past five years, check out the turnover from the previous year. How many different teams made the playoffs compared to the year before:

 

"2005: 7.

2006: 7.

2007: 6.

2008: 7.

2009: 6.

 

"So for five straight years there's been at least a 50-percent turnover in the playoff teams. Remember that as you throw crap at your computer when you see I don't have New England making the playoffs, but I do have Carolina in the big dance. There's not quite the same high number of playoff changes (I have five of 12 different from 2009), but I do have five of eight division winners changing."