Bills seek fresh start in youth, not experience

[Don't Panic]

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070430/SPORTS0103/704300321

A team can't part ways with 11 veterans that had played in 975 career NFL games with 777 starts and not feel the impact, particularly against what will be the league's toughest schedule this fall.

Ouch! When you put it that way it sounds really harsh. David... meet Goliath.

[LifetimeBillsFan]

Re: Bills seek fresh start in youth, not experience

My question is: Did the guy who wrote that happen to see the mess that those experienced veterans made of the Bills lockerroom and season in 2005?

Well, I did. For all of the big-names, experience and potential that it had, that was a leaderless, character-less, gutless team. And, I said so in my articles on the BZ front page at the time.

You can talk about leadership all you want, but, on three occasions in 2005, Spikes and Fletcher-Baker addressed their teammates at halftime of tight games, imploring them to play better, especially on defense. On all three occasions the Bills defense allowed their opponents to score on their first possession of the second half after these addresses. So much for veteran leaders--no matter how much you yell and scream and try to pump your teammates up, you can't be a leader of a team if no one will follow you.

Spikes was upset that Marv Levy got rid of a bunch of the older veteran players who were major elements of the problems that that team had when he came in last year. But, what had all of those players accomplished? Nothing. When they had a chance to make it to the playoffs by beating a bunch of Steelers back-ups at home, they fell apart when their FG kicker missed a chip-shot FG (great under pressure, huh?). The defense had gaudy stats, but how many times did they let the opposition drive down the field for the winning score at the end of the game. Yeah, they ranked 2nd in total defense--yards allowed--but were 7th or 8th in points allowed. As bad as the rookie laden Bills defense was against the run last year, they ranked 10th in points allowed--not much worse than their more heralded, older, more expensive, veteran predecessors.

Need I go on? Because I can if you want. Suffice it to say that for all of their previous accomplishments, those veteran players, with all of their experience, left the Bills a mess at the end of 2005. And, that was a situation that no owner, GM or new coach could live with or tolerate. Changes had to be made, however painful. And they have been. And, what has the result been so far? With five rookie starters and a QB whose confidence had been shaken, if not shattered, the previous year, without some of those veterans and their experience, the Bills managed to win 2 more games than in 2005 and come close to winning 2-4 more.

No matter how well he plays in Baltimore, the Bills will not miss the disgruntled, "I'll run hard when I feel like it and won't when I don't", Willis McGahee. I know A.Thomas isn't as talented and I'm not saying that M.Lynch will be better than McGahee will be in Baltimore (I don't know that), but the players that the Bills have now will give more effort more consistently than the Bills could have gotten out of McGahee. There can be no debate about that.

Takeo Spikes might regain his former All-Pro form in Philly. And, then again, he might not. It doesn't matter. For most of the last two years Spikes was injured and gave little to the Bills except his complaints about how Marv Levy was getting rid of all of his friends--the vets who created the 2005 mess. I have already cited how that team responded to his efforts to lead them, but that did not matter to him. With them gone, he wanted out of Buffalo. And, with a rookie who had been drafted in the 6th round out-playing him in the games that he missed, there was no reason for the Bills not to accomodate him and 9.5 million additional reasons for them to do so. Will his fire and competitiveness be missed? Yes. But the Bills won't really miss what Spikes gave to them on the field the last two years because they got just as much from Keith Ellison when he was on the field last year. And, they won't miss Spikes complaining in the media about how the Bills are letting all of his friends who failed the team and its fans go.

If A.Youboty or E.Bassey do not step up and play up to their capabilities this season the Bills will miss N.Clements. But, there are 80 million reasons why Clements is gone. The Bills were able to sign 3 veteran offensive linemen to shore up one of its weakest areas for less money than it would have taken to sign Clements. Will he be missed? Probably. But, not as much as it would have hurt the team's future to keep him. Bills fans know that, for as good as Clements could be at times, he was inconsistent: he could be lackadaisical for half a season and stellar for half a season. It could vary from game to game. The self-proclained "Playmaker" could be the kind of playmaker that the Bills still need at times, but, then, there were games like the infamous game in Miami when C.Chambers ate the Bills' secondary for lunch. As far as leadership from Clements was concerned, who could forget the last play of that game: when 3 Pro Bowlers stood around and left an undersized rookie nickleback alone in coverage against the towering Chambers on the decisive two-point conversion? Yes, Nate could show leadership at times, but where was his leadership there? Wherever it was, it won't be missed.

London Fletcher-Baker's leadership is the only leadership from this foursome that will be missed. He was a pro's pro, who gave his all and tried to lead a group of teammates who would not be led when they didn't want to be. But, at 32, he wanted to get one last big payday--I don't blame him--and, for all of his effort and saavy, he was not quite a good fit in the Bills' new defensive scheme. It would have been foolish for the Bills to give him the kind of contract that he wanted at his age even if he had been a fit in their defense. Yes, they will miss his leadership, but they have to hope that A.Crowell and some of the other young vets on the team learned how to be leaders from him and now can take over that role for the team. Players get old and have to be replaced all of the time--it is a part of the game. But, the team and the game go on and younger players have to step up and become leaders and take over for those leaders who have moved on or retired. The Bills have to hope that, as part of their emphasis on bringing in players with "character", they have also brought in players who have the ability to lead as well as players who have the ability to follow their team's leaders.

Experience only comes from playing. And leaders can only emerge from those who are on the field a lot and in a position to lead. Young players can never get experience or show what they can do if they are sitting on the bench because the team keeps bringing in experienced players or is afraid to let them play. Will the Bills miss some of the experience that they have lost with these players moving on? Well, yes: until their young players get experience from playing and the leaders that they will follow emerge they will miss that experience. But, if they play, they will get the experience that they and the team needs and their leaders will emerge. That's going to take another year or two--which is why I keep telling everyone that the Bills are a "work-in-progress". But, once they have that experience and their young leaders emerge, they will be a formidable team and ready to make a real run not just a a playoff berth for a season when they have an easy schedule, but a serious and sustained run for a Super Bowl berth and title. However, none of those four players that they have lost this offseason would be a part of that, even if the Bills had broken the bank this offseason to keep them.