HurlyBurly51 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Speaking of assuming, go back and read the original post. This sounds like an unrequited love to me. Just because London says he wants to come back now, doesn't mean the front office necessarily wants him back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv's Neighbor 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. Hopefully, if the BILLS sign Fletcher, it will be because there are no other MLB's available that could consistently out play him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I'll note that this news came shortly after Lance Briggs went off the market. The top Cover-2 LB is gone, and now the Bills are talking about extending their guy. Hmmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 We won't pay him a big contract. We don't have the money to dish out very large contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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? One of Marv's cliches is that the HC who makes moves sacrificing performance in the present to prepare the team to win in the future won't be the coach in the future. There is a reasonable case to be made that last year was to some extent a freebie for Jauron (and Levy) as a downturn in our W/L could have been contextualized as us reloading so therefore we took a hit then for a better tomorrow. However, to Jauron and Marv's credit, the team improved its W/L while playing opponents who also produced a good W/L last year. In essence, anything at 7-9 or worse will be seen as a failure by Marv, the team and the media and likely most fans. Perhaps some forgiving fans would accept a one year downturn in D and team production while our MLB of the future goes through his learning curve on his way to the future glory 3 years from now you envision. However, I do not see the team making a choice to jettison Fletch unless there is some legitimate plan to have a starting LB is more than just an investment in the future. This is why I will be quite surprised and disappointed if we draft Willis (or any rookie) with the idea of him being our starting MLB. Certainly we can drft and start a rookie at a less critical position as we did with Whitner at SS and the plethora of rookie starters last year, but MLB in a Tampa 2 should not be a rookie, even a talented one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Our team could take a lesson from the ravens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 You people are crazy. Anyways. It'll be good to have London back. I would love to see someone point out whats wrong with leading the team in Ints and Tackles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 and now the Bills are talking about extending their guy. Hmmm... Really? Hmmm....I thought it was London on a radio show saying he would be interested in re-signing with Buffalo. Why rule out a potential paycheck? Have the Bills confirmed their mutual interest in not extending, but offering a new lucrative contract to LF-B? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfaningeneseo Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 If we can sign Fletcher, I do think it will be a great boost to the off-season, as it allows us to focus on some other areas. If he is resigned, I could see us going after a FA cornerback, and allow Youbuty to move into the nickel position, and also look at signing one of the better FA guards (Dielman, etc). If this happens, I could see us going after a OT or OG in the first round, depending on how much the team likes Pennington/Butler/others, or potentially taking McGahee's replacement who can also help run the dual-backs system this year. Possibly look in the second round at a LB or OG/OG/RB (whichever they don't take in the first), and 3rd round at CB depth. I think that would put us on a pretty good track, but only my humble opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills_Chick Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 if london signs, then we most def will select a CB w/ our first pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quester74 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 You people are crazy. Anyways. It'll be good to have London back. I would love to see someone point out whats wrong with leading the team in Ints and Tackles? Making 150 tackles, 5 yards beyond the LOS.. isn't all that impressive. That being said, alot of the blame can be put squarely on the shoulders of the D-line. Improve the D-line, and LF has the potential to be an All-Pro. To hell with drafting a CB with the #1 pick.. pick a DT. D-lines make LB's and CB's better.. not the other way around. (Although, without Nate's "lockdown" ability.. expect Schobel's sack numbers to drop.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 if london signs, then we most def will select a CB w/ our first pick Why do you say that? I think that with this team there isn't one position that we MUST go with in the 1st round, especially if London is back. While CB is a possibility, I see no reason why its a necessity. Just because we used to have a playmaking cornerback who is now gone...it doesn't mean we necessarily have to replace him with another high-profile corner. In our Tampa 2 we'd be fine with McGee, K. Thomas (or another similar free agent), Youboty and a 2nd day draft pick. We have a whole lot of positions that could use help, but don't really require a 1st round pick. We could go DE, DT, OT, OG, WR, HB, CB, TE, MLB, OLB...our team really can pick the best player available, instead of just saying that. I see cornerback as just another possibility among a host of other positions. It really makes this draft interesting for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts