JimBob2232 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Fletcher Wants To Stay: London Fletcher was on Sirius NFL radio yesterday and expresses his desire to stay in Buffalo. He said the team is really on the right track with some solid young players and they are heading in the right direction. Fletcher said his agent Drew Rosenhaus and the Bills will have some discussion during the combine and try to get something done before the start of free agency. This contradicts a bit the statements made by Marv Levy who said last week that the team needs more aggressive linebackers, not the kind that makes tackles behind the play. Fletcher said after the season ended that he will make this decision based on his family as it is his last big contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Fletcher Wants To Stay: London Fletcher was on Sirius NFL radio yesterday and expresses his desire to stay in Buffalo. He said the team is really on the right track with some solid young players and they are heading in the right direction. Fletcher said his agent Drew Rosenhaus and the Bills will have some discussion during the combine and try to get something done before the start of free agency. This contradicts a bit the statements made by Marv Levy who said last week that the team needs more aggressive linebackers, not the kind that makes tackles behind the play. Fletcher said after the season ended that he will make this decision based on his family as it is his last big contract. good. Having London certainly can't hurt the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheZone78 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 NO!!!!!!! I'm sorry but this is a move that he Bills should not make. I respect London for his heart and steady play making abilities, but you need to go into a new direction at MLB. If the Bills re-sign Fletcher it will just go to show you that they are not capable of making those tough but right decisions. Fletcher probably skimmed the market and found out that he's not as valued as he thinks he is. I'd put money on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDRupp Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 good. Having London certainly can't hurt the Bills. Like I said before, I think he played great in coverage last year. I like him a lot just not sure if he is an attacking the LOS tackler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 London may not be the best MLB we could have, but I'd rather have one less gaping hole to fill this coming year. Draft a good prospect and groom him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 NO!!!!!!! I'm sorry but this is a move that he Bills should not make. I respect London for his heart and steady play making abilities, but you need to go into a new direction at MLB. If the Bills re-sign Fletcher it will just go to show you that they are not capable of making those tough but right decisions. Fletcher probably skimmed the market and found out that he's not as valued as he thinks he is. I'd put money on it. Well stated. The only thing I will say about this is that this is a different era of free agency. With the increased tv revenue & cap, you are not going to see that many big name players hit the open market anymore like we have seen in year's past. I would like to improve on fletcher's position, with that being said, I think we could do alot worse then have LF as our middle linebacker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 NO!!!!!!! I'm sorry but this is a move that he Bills should not make. I respect London for his heart and steady play making abilities, but you need to go into a new direction at MLB. If the Bills re-sign Fletcher it will just go to show you that they are not capable of making those tough but right decisions. Fletcher probably skimmed the market and found out that he's not as valued as he thinks he is. I'd put money on it. I'm not sure Buffalo is in the position to be making power plays. Having London is a direct and indirect improvment. He can help as both a player and a mentor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 London may not be the best MLB we could have, but I'd rather have one less gaping hole to fill this coming year. Draft a good prospect and groom him. Exactly. It also could also allow us to go CB early and grab a stud LB in next year's draft. I agree with Marv that we need more attacking LB's. But as we saw with Urlacher, your LB's become a lot more attacking when they have a great DL in front of them. I say focus on the d-line and CB in this draft and stick with the LB's we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Fletcher probably skimmed the market and found out that he's not as valued as he thinks he is. I'd put money on it. And I wouldn't bet against you. The simple fact is that this whole thing is a game. LF-B agent is Rosenhaus. I'm certain that this is a strategy he came up with and, now that it clearly hasn't worked, it's time for plan B. The good news is that we may get Fletcher signed for the rest of his career - at a relatively cheap price. IF this was Marv's intention all along then he is a lot smarter than all of us think. However, I don't agree that it's a good idea, in general, to get rid of LF all together. We have no idea who can fit where, who can play MLB, etc. I prefer that we do what we did with the QB situation: Let the guys we have/sign, plus whatever draft pick(s) we get, compete in training camp. The practice field is where these decisions should be made, not the conference room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUFFALOTONE Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Exactly. It also could also allow us to go CB early and grab a stud LB in next year's draft. I agree with Marv that we need more attacking LB's. But as we saw with Urlacher, your LB's become a lot more attacking when they have a great DL in front of them. I say focus on the d-line and CB in this draft and stick with the LB's we have. Agree 100%. You can see the difference all across the board. Look how bad Ray Lewis was without Adams and Siragusa to take up 4 guys. Also look at how Londons play dropped off without Adams and PW. You can see the difference it made for Urlacher who practically went un blocked all year long, having Harris and Tank helped him out immensly. And by the way I think ray Lewis is the most overrated player in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 NO!!!!!!! I'm sorry but this is a move that he Bills should not make. I respect London for his heart and steady play making abilities, but you need to go into a new direction at MLB. If the Bills re-sign Fletcher it will just go to show you that they are not capable of making those tough but right decisions. Fletcher probably skimmed the market and found out that he's not as valued as he thinks he is. I'd put money on it. The question is what exactly and specifically is this new direction you are talking about. I simply do not see any new directions that do not involve the D being even worse for a significant enough period of time that it likely involves losing a few games as you take your chances breaking in a new MLB. FA- This is the most viable option for getting an LB who has seen enough NFL plays to be able to do good diagnosis to determine whether the MLB is operating like a DT on that play being required to plug the run or like a safety being asked to do pass coverage in the center of the field in our version of the Cover 2. Kiwaka Mitchell of KC seems to be the most desirable MLB who is a UFA out there and I have never seen him play but I have heard no one talk about him as a greatly desired Cover 2 MLB. Draft- Willis seems to be the most desirable MLB out there, but given that he struggled with pass coverage against top flight college competition in the Senior Bowl it makes an even bigger question out of whether he has the skillset to perform adequately as an MLB in our Cover 2. Even without this issue, there is little doubt that even if he does have the physical ability to play our MLB which is in question now, there would still be what is likely to be a relatively painful learning curve as he learns how to read NFL plays like a vet rather than a rookie. Willis dropping like a stone in some mocks may actually make his a more viable draft option for the Bills because though it would likely be silly to draft him in the 1st round to start at MLB, it might make a little sense to tag or reach agreement with Fletch and draft him in the 2nd if he slips to sit on the bench, play ST and learn behind Fletch for a year. What seems to make more sense for the draft is to take the more highly rated than Willis Poluszny or Timmons at OLB which allows you to start this rookie at the less difficult OLB slot and them move Crowell to MLB. Internal- The move would be what Marv talked about in his presser of moving Crowell over and then replacing him either through the draft or invest in an FA like Adalius Thomas. If we let F-B go this would be my preferred option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Fletcher would likely make more "plays at the line of scrimmage" if the line of scrimmage wasn't pushed 4 yards forward so frequently by the opponent's O-line. The D-line needs to be better against the run too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 The Tampa-2 almost creates a cover-3 type zone, with the MLB getting the very back middle portion of the field. Having a MLB who is extremely good in coverage is a key. I'd welcome London back with open arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Fletcher would likely make more "plays at the line of scrimmage" if the line of scrimmage wasn't pushed 4 yards forward so frequently by the opponent's O-line. The D-line needs to be better against the run too. Need to get some interrior lineman who can eat up blockers. When you can block interior lineman one on one, your man in the middle is going to struggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Fletcher had some trouble last year fending off blockers and making tackles near the line of scrimmage. But since half the plays are pass plays and I thought he played terrific in the Bills pass defense, that has to be considered just as highly. We could do worse. I, too, however, think that they probably haven't been hearing what they want to hear about how much money he will be offered. He, unfortunately, has a lot of mileage on his body, getting up there in age, and relies on his pursuit/speed to be effective. No one is going to give him a huge contract. Decent, but not big money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Fletcher probably skimmed the market and found out that he's not as valued as he thinks he is. I'd put money on it. You're all but certain to win that bet. Rosenhaus is a slimebag but he's not an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Exactly. It also could also allow us to go CB early and grab a stud LB in next year's draft. I agree with Marv that we need more attacking LB's. But as we saw with Urlacher, your LB's become a lot more attacking when they have a great DL in front of them. I say focus on the d-line and CB in this draft and stick with the LB's we have. Bad assumption thinking Marv was referring to Fletch. Last time I checked there were two other guys playing LB. Marv didn't specifically mention MLB nor Fletch, so stop assuming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStranger76 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 He seemed to make enough tackles at the line of scrimmage when Pat and Sam Adams were our DT's. Just sayin man, I'm just sayin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Fletcher would likely make more "plays at the line of scrimmage" if the line of scrimmage wasn't pushed 4 yards forward so frequently by the opponent's O-line. The D-line needs to be better against the run too. BINGO!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dual RB way to go Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 BINGO!!! LOL - only ONE BINGO!!! winner per week please! Seriously, the DL was pushed back 4 yards frequently at a speed so fast that a MLB couldn't get into position to make a tackle at the line of scrimmage? Sounds like a tuff sell, even for fletchers agent. Do we want Fletcher there in 3 years at MLB at the cost that they will demand? Or draft this year or next year a MLB and in 3 years, might make a major impact like that excellent rookie MLB for the texans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts