i guess bills just didn't think fletcher was that good

[truth on hold]

$12.5MM guaranteed money is not that great. bills will likely pay fletcher's replacement something not that far off, when it's all said and done.

 

i think they want an MLB that's better in pass coverage. if willis is available at 12 i think it's a lock bills take him. something tells me that's the outcome they're banking on.

[dreadlox]

actually most seem to think they actually wanted a stouter mlb who could make more tackles at the line. willis would be my choice also. trade one willis, draft a better one.

[Astrobot]

For a while I thought this might be Cato June, but he isn't stouter than Fletcher. June is a younger version who had double-digit tackles in more than a half dozen games for the Colts in a "down" year for him in 2006-7. He has the cover-2 speed and the surehanded tackling, but not the bulk, maybe, to supplant LF-B.

[tombstone56]

actually most seem to think they actually wanted a stouter mlb who could make more tackles at the line. willis would be my choice also. trade one willis, draft a better one.

 

goodbye ..see ya ,,, adios..ole "london,im falling down fletcher" you lead our team in .personal fouls ,,, and tackles..but most were TOF that tripped over facemask on the way by.. see ya

 

go patrick willis!!!! our next mlb

[Tcali]

actually most seem to think they actually wanted a stouter mlb who could make more tackles at the line. willis would be my choice also. trade one willis, draft a better one.

YES--Marv more than hunted that we wanted/needed more of a run stuffer at MLB.--Especially with the dreck we have a DT.

[Bills Fan888]

They got rid of him because they don't wnt a pursuit linebacker and because they're getting rid of all the people who complained about JP.

[Nanker]

Of course we "could" have signed him to the same money the Washedup Deadskins did.

But we didn't.

Marv didn't because he wasn't that valuable to The Bills.

 

London's a good man.

I'm happy for him.

He deserves the $5. million he's going to get this year from Dan Snyder.

He doesn't deserve to be jerked around by Snyder next year though, when they come a-calling to renegotiate his big contract downward so they can do their yearly cap dance.

[truth on hold]

actually most seem to think they actually wanted a stouter mlb who could make more tackles at the line. willis would be my choice also. trade one willis, draft a better one.

with fletcher's "fire hydrant on short legs" build plugging holes at the line was what he did best. "cover-2" 4-3 defenses means every LB has to have some coverage skills. methinks that's the real reason they dumped fletcher (just calling it like it is, they made no attempt to keep him) in favor for a faster, long armed willis.

[Oneonta Buffalo Fan]

Why are there people here saying that the Bills move to sign 3 linemen is a worse decision than keeping Clements? Why? Is it because of the money we spent on the guys. That's what I'm hearing. Is it because for the same amount of money we paid these 3 linemen we could have got Clements back? That's what I'm hearing.

 

WHY???????

 

I just don't get it. You people really don't understand what's just happened. Yes, we did lose a great player but we got 3 quality players in return. 3! The CB was is not the heart of the problem on the Bills. The problem was the o-line and it's been for years. NOW, we finally have a good o-line and people just complain about how we overpaid for an GREAT o-line that will protect Jp, help out whoever will be our RB by creating holes, and help this team to be a top 10 team on offense possibly.

 

I really don't understand how you can complain over this. We sacrificed a great deal of money here to put together a top 10 line and still people complain. How? Why? It's doesn't make sense. Now instead of worrying how are we going to fix the o-line now we can concentrate on building the defense.

 

I really don't care that we spent enough money on 3 players that would could have had Clements back. To tell you the truth Clements wasn't all that great. He blew a lot of deep passes and couldn't cover well during the 1st half of the season. I don't understand why you would waste over $80 million trying to get 1 player back that really isn't going to help the team much. Now we got 3 key players that will help the offense which we've struggled on more than the defense. We've been OK on defense even when Clements was here. We can always get Leon Hall to fill in his position.

 

Those of you are criticizing the Bills actually making a splash this year in FA and actually trying to improve the team, should go find another team to root for. Buffalo is not your team. You're not a true supporter of a playoff calibur team now. You have no faith in Marv, Wilson, or the team for that matter. LEAVE!!!!!!!!!!

This all goes with Fletcher.

[Albany,n.y.]

It's pretty obvious watching Marv operate that he will not give big $, long term deals to guys on the wrong side of 30. Every big contract FA he has signed is in his mid 20's. Marv doesn't want big contracts given to guys who may only have a year or 2 left. Since he's been here he's dumped or not re-signed Sam Adams (32), Matt Bowen (30), Mark Campbell (30), London Fletcher-Baker (31), Lawyer Milloy (32), Eric Moulds (32), Jeff Posey (31), Damon Shelton (34), Trey Teague (31), Chris Villarrial (33), and Troy Vincent (35). Once you hit 30, you're on the endangered species list. Holcomb & Takeo are next. Note that the only FA he's signed who is over 30 signed a 1 year deal for small $.

[Koufax]

Of course we "could" have signed him to the same money the Washedup Deadskins did.

But we didn't.

Marv didn't because he wasn't that valuable to The Bills.

 

London's a good man.

I'm happy for him.

He deserves the $5. million he's going to get this year from Dan Snyder.

He doesn't deserve to be jerked around by Snyder next year though, when they come a-calling to renegotiate his big contract downward so they can do their yearly cap dance.

 

Agreed. I wish London the best, but I don't think this move was about money...I think this move is about getting a better player at that position. Remains to be seen how, but the issue with London was not dollars. If they wanted him back he would have been signed much earlier, but this is a football move. So this is unlike Nate who we would have definitely kept if not for the dollars.

[TedBundy]

I like the fact that we are young and Marv isn't signing overpriced vets. It truly makes me wonder...Are we going to compete for the AFC East this year? I think we will and we seem to be the only team to be upgrading in a significant way.

 

Go Bills.

[scribo]

$12.5MM guaranteed money is not that great. bills will likely pay fletcher's replacement something not that far off, when it's all said and done.

 

i think they want an MLB that's better in pass coverage. if willis is available at 12 i think it's a lock bills take him. something tells me that's the outcome they're banking on.

This was not about the money for either side. Fletcher wanted a longterm deal, which Washington gave him. I think the Bills would have given him about the same annual salary but only a a two- or three-year contract.