The Big Cat Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Losing LF is a step back when you have so many other holes to fill, unless you believe every year is a re-building year, It never ends! the same was said about Moulds, Milloy, Adams, and Campbell...replaceable is replaceable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 guy has left his heart on the field, sacrificed his body, and feels that he deserved an extension. His play merited it. I don't blame the guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 London Fletcher has poored his heart and soul into a team that hasn't even shown how much it should appreciate him. For London, I don't think it's about the money or how much of an extension, it's the fact that after playing for us for so long and giving every he has for the Bills, the message he is getting from Ralph and the others is that despite that not only is he replaceable, but will be replaced. London obviously is a loyal man, he deserves to get to finish his career here since he likes it in Buffalo.....but he won't get to. I agree. London is one of the few stand up guys that has played here in Buffalo. Holding one's frustrations in until the year is over is something that never happens anymore these days. He could have easily been a distraction, but instead kept his mouth hard and busted his balls for the players and fans all year long. I hope we can re-sign him, but if not I hope he makes a ton of money elsewhere and only has the best for himself and his family. Thank you London! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Angel Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 We're sort of like the minor league farm club, developing stars for the big clubs. Really the idea behind developing a winner is to fill roster holes faster than they open up. And with us possibly losing NC and LF, that's already two big ones to re-fill before we even start on improving ourselves London Plays hard but must of his tackles are in persuit, he had a good year with 4 picks, but he rarely ever stuffs a play at or behind the line of srimmage. The focus needs to be on resigning Clements as quality corners are much harder to find than middle linebackers, Kelsay really picked up his level of play this year and he should be prioritized over London. London did alot of good things here but the bucks need to be spent elsewhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 London Plays hard but must of his tackles are in persuit, he had a good year with 4 picks, but he rarely ever stuffs a play at or behind the line of srimmage. The focus needs to be on resigning Clements as quality corners are much harder to find than middle linebackers, Kelsay really picked up his level of play this year and he should be prioritized over London. London did alot of good things here but the bucks need to be spent elsewhere Hey I hate to sound contrary to my tag but most of the London defenders are right: he has been pretty outstanding on otherwise bad teams the past 4 years or so. He has also shown to be consistently classy and patient with our braindead local media after every stunning loss the bills have managed to shat out recently. Bottom line is though he IS 32 and headed for the downslope soon. He also has never been a fiery "do-everything" type of LB. So to put this one down: Is LF-B a great LB and will it hurt to lose him? Sure. But is he irreplaceable? Not by a long shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throwbackbilly Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 "London Plays hard but must of his tackles are in persuit, he had a good year with 4 picks, but he rarely ever stuffs a play at or behind the line of srimmage." This is a complete oxymoron statement. The Bills play the Cover 2 and Fletch's job is to drop back on passes and to contain the running back on runs. We have an interior D line that runners busted through all year long, injured or inexperienced outside LBs, young corners and Dbacks...and his job is to "stay home" and not over-pursue in our cover two scheme. He very rarely had runners shake him off, easily led the defense in stopping runs on impact, and showed he was quick enough to deflect passes, intercept balls, and jump on fumbles. I agree with the writer that talked about "plugging holes" while letting more holes open up...I would be more concerned about Spikes and Crowell getting healthy around the ILB position before I would even think about parting ways with London. His emotion is showing his desire to stay- and probably his frustration with Rosenhaus not giving a crap about where London lands- knowing that some team will pay- and his superagent turning his attention to #21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 The man never ran his mouth, never got national recognition for being the leading tackler in the league the last 5 years in the entire NFL, had to endure through a developing Losman, Holcomb and Drew Bledsoe at QB, was the leader of the #2 defense two years in a row, watched the team let go Pat Williams and Sam Adams (though that was the right move) for god awful Tim Anderson, and the best he saw was a 9-7 season (bad run on I know ). Honestly, I can understand why he would be frustrated. He never complained, and despite all the nonsense, wanted to remain a Bill. If he blows out his knee, would anyone care? Football is a rough business and I think he's the type of player who should be reward. And way too many of you just assume that it is easy to replace LF. Physically, there is no doubt there are many candidates to replace him. However, you don't build chemistry by letting your best players and leaders go every year and just inserting rookies. Give the man a 2 or 3 year deal and get his replacement this year or next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkwwjd Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 In today’s FA big $$ reality, how can a small market team like Buffalo rebuild if they are constantly losing key players to FA. It’s like a revolving door here in Buffalo as soon as a player gets good and gels with the team their gone to FA. You cannot rebuild like this, too many holes keep popping up year after year. Yeah, you can't just keep letting your FA go, year after year. Really, just look at the Pittsburgh Steelers. Big names and production don't mean much in the NFL. What IS important? Your GM's prognosis on future production compared to other options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 London is a classy guy -- and a good team-first presence on the field. By his physical talent, he's probably one of the worst LBs in the league -- but his heart and guile server to elevate him much higher than that. The coaches were very vocal in their praises of him this season -- and Marv Levy went so far as to single him out as a Pro Bowl snub. Thus, there is plenty of respect for him within the organization. As for Fletcher's belief that he has been handled unfairly... Well, first recall that there was a brand new staff that took over last off-season. They clearly placed a higher priority on things other than extending the contract of LF -- or really any other players for that matter. My memory isn't always the best, but I can't remember any player's contract that they did extend last season. I know that Lindell's contract was recently extended -- and Fletcher pointed that out in his post-game interview. However, the Bills have supposedly approached Fletcher recently about a contract extension too -- and his agent has reportedly left them hanging. Thus, I view much of what LF had to say as gamesmanship, as he heads into free agency. Now... the real question is: Should the Bills break the bank on Fletcher? There are many reasons to want him back -- most of which have already been cited here. However, there is also ample reason to use caution, as he is 32 years old and on the downward side of his career. And as hard as he has played, as the middle linebacker he also has to accept some of the responsibility for the poor run defense that we saw this year. Furthermore, he plays at a position where you can usually find pretty good talent in the 2-3 rounds of the draft. As much as it pains me to say... considering that he is looking for one more BIG payday -- and is likely to find it SOMEWHERE given his productivity over the last few years -- I'd say that the Bills should instead invest that money on some of the younger players who are reaching their 2nd contract -- Nate, Evans, maybe even JP and/or Willis -- before overpaying for this overachiever's 3rd contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Back here in Pittsburgh, the Steelers are reluctant to give a new contract to Joey porter....the guy who made plays in last years playoffs including the super bowl...because he is above 30 years old.... You have to be smart about whom you pay.....The bills will let Clements and Fletcher walk this year and take their chances with lower priced talent and the draft. Considering that with Fletcher their run defense still ranked at the bottom, how bad can they go. Ellison has been playing very well and if Crowell comes back from his injury, either him or TKO can move to the inside. There are also other good free agent LBs like Thomas from Baltimore, Briggs from Chicago available to the highest bidder. If the Bills are going to throw money at the LB position, then they might as well throw it at those guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts