The media is obsessed with big names

[Mr. Miyagi]

Here's John Clayton's latest assessment of the Bills:

Are the Bills really better at linebacker without Takeo Spikes and London Fletcher?

A follow-up question is whether the Bills are as good at running back with Marshawn Lynch replacing Willis McGahee. Naturally, the Bills wanted Patrick Willis to be their first-round pick. He would have been the anchor to their linebacking corps, but the 49ers drafted him one spot ahead of the Bills. Marv Levy believes he found a new Shane Conlin with the second-round selection of Paul Posluszny.

Spikes and Fletcher are gone, so the linebacking group has been completely overhauled. With a defensive line that isn't dominating, it is hard to tell whether the defense is even better. Making things worse is the loss of Nate Clements at cornerback. The Bills are hoping to get by with Terrence McGee and Ashton Youboty. As a low-revenue team, the Bills have to cut some financial corners. It remains to be seen whether they cut their collective throats by losing too many key defenders.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2860110

He's not alone. It's obvious that many media "experts" are skeptical of our upcoming season because we've lost all these big name players, which they just can't see past. But how do these big name players really stack up?

Linebackers:

London Fletcher was #3 in tackles. Big loss to us. But Spikes was ranked #68, behind Crowell @ #59 and just above Ellison @ #75. Losing London hurts, but we gained Posluzsny and if he's any good, the hit isn't so big.

D-backs:

Nate Clements was #56 in tackles, whereas Whitner was #5, McGee was #41, and Simpson was #42. 3 interceptions, 19 passes defeneded (though that's pretty good).

Replaceable. Way overrated.

Runningbacks:

Willis McGahee was ranked #21 in yards/game, or 36 in yards/att (among backs with 100+ carries), behind guys like Willie Parker, Tatum Bell, and even Ladell Betts for crying out loud.

No big loss.

All in all, what hurt us the most was the loss of Fletcher. Spikes is completely replaceable, as is McGahee. Depends on the development of Youboty, the loss of Clements could have minor effect. Plus we gained a lot in offensive line, which is a big step towards helping our defense.

Discuss.

[gr8slayer]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Funny how they start to notice how good they were once they leave Buffalo.

[OpIv37]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Agree that McGahee is replaceable.

When it comes to Clements, he was definitely overrated and overpaid. But no one on our current roster has proven to be equal or better. There will definitely be a drop-off in play at this time.

As far as Ellison and Spikes- if Spikes is so easily replaceable, why wasn't he benched for Ellison last year? I think Ellison is average and he played so much because he was in the right place at the right time. He's certainly not a liability, but he's nowhere near the playmaker Spikes was before the injury. Remember, our D SUCKED last year- lateral movement is going to get us the same results. We need clear improvement. And at this point, it isn't clear that Ellison is better than Spikes.

As far as Fletcher and Poz- I think Poz will be good but it will take him time to adjust to the NFL. And Fletcher had experience and leadership that may come to Poz in time but won't be there on opening day of 2007.

And our D line still sucks.

Conclusion: there's a chance we could be better off in the long run with all these changes and all this youth, but as far as defense on the opening day of 2007 is concerned, it's tough to argue that we're equal to where we were in 2006 and insane to argue that we're better.

[justasportsfan]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

As far as Ellison and Spikes- if Spikes is so easily replaceable, why wasn't he benched for Ellison last year? .

Are you assuming that Spikes was put back because he played better than Eillison. The game tapes don't say so.

I can also make assumptions.....Marv has always said, the starter should never lose his job to injury. Remember Reich and Kelly?

And our D line still sucks. .

only on paper.

[OpIv37]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Are you assuming that Spikes was put back because he played better than Eillison. The game tapes don't say so.

I can also make assumptions.....Marv has always said, the starter should never lose his job to injury. Remember Reich and Kelly?

Yeah, here's the difference- when Kelly came back from his injury, he played better than Reich. At no point was it ever clear that Reich was better than Kelly.

You said the game tapes suggest Ellison played better than Spikes. Well, if Spikes started for a few games after coming back and never equalled Ellison's level of play, then he didn't lose his job to injury- he lost it to being outplayed. if you're suggesting that Jauron put a worse player on the field so it didn't create the appearance of a starter losing his job to injury, that's just asinine.

only on paper.

Well our DL sucked on paper in 2005 and 2006 too- how did that work out?

[Mr. Miyagi]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Conclusion: there's a chance we could be better off in the long run with all these changes and all this youth, but as far as defense on the opening day of 2007 is concerned, it's tough to argue that we're equal to where we were in 2006 and insane to argue that we're better.

Fair enough assessment. But my point is that the drop off isn't remotely as big as the media makes it sound like, as if OMG the Bills has nobody to step in and replace these people now. We've been planning for the departure of these players for at least one draft class already. The only problem is that they're names that the media doesn't yet recognize, so in their eyes we have not replaced them at all.

[OpIv37]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Fair enough assessment. But my point is that the drop off isn't remotely as big as the media makes it sound like, as if OMG the Bills has nobody to step in and replace these people now. We've been planning for the departure of these players for at least one draft class already. The only problem is that they're names that the media doesn't yet recognize, so in their eyes we have not replaced them at all.

You could argue that we didn't replace Clements because our replacement was already on our roster but has barely played at all- we're basically trying to replace him with the depth we already had, and it's unproven.

As far as the other guys- we've got two draft picks and a vet for McGahee, we got Poz to replace Fletcher, Crowell was already a starter and Ellison played enough that he could be considered "groomed" to be Spikes' replacement.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

You could argue that we didn't replace Clements because our replacement was already on our roster but has barely played at all- we're basically trying to replace him with the depth we already had, and it's unproven.

As far as the other guys- we've got two draft picks and a vet for McGahee, we got Poz to replace Fletcher, Crowell was already a starter and Ellison played enough that he could be considered "groomed" to be Spikes' replacement.

Don't look now Op but you're sounding borderline encouraged. Whoa.

[gr8slayer]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Don't look now Op but you're sounding borderline encouraged. Whoa.

Say it ain't so.

[bigbub2352]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Funny how they start to notice how good they were once they leave Buffalo.

I agree 100%, i dont ever, and i mean ever remember them talking about Fletcher, he always got jipped out of the ALL-pro game, same with Nate Clements, when was he ever mentioned as a top 5 corner, but he leaves buffalo and he is the best, it happens with the sabres too. **** espn

[gr8slayer]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

I agree 100%, i dont ever, and i mean ever remember them talking about Fletcher, he always got jipped out of the ALL-pro game, same with Nate Clements, when was he ever mentioned as a top 5 corner, but he leaves buffalo and he is the best, it happens with the sabres too. **** espn

Yeah, makes me sick but at the same time I love it because it gives us the chance to sneak up on people.

Also, McGahee never got the coverage he's getting now, even when he was playing like a top tier RB in '04.

[Mr. Pink]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Fair enough assessment. But my point is that the drop off isn't remotely as big as the media makes it sound like, as if OMG the Bills has nobody to step in and replace these people now. We've been planning for the departure of these players for at least one draft class already. The only problem is that they're names that the media doesn't yet recognize, so in their eyes we have not replaced them at all.

Replacing Spikes at this point, with the contribution he had last year, would have taken putting me or you on the field in all honesty. All he was last year was a big name with a big time injury. I've said before, I woulda cut his ass loose last offseason, just going by what we've seen that injury do to other LBers. I'm willing to see what Ellison can do in a full-season and if it's not good enough, so be it. We can work towards a replacement next year. But at least give the guy a chance.

Clements? I've never liked the guy even back to his days at The Ohio St University. Big flash, good skill set, dumb decision making on the field. He was always the guy who went for the big play as opposed to the smart play. He can shuffle his overpaid keister off to San Fran, enjoy covering Mr. Holt twice a year.

With our defensive scheme, sure there is a big talent drop off with him gone, but you don't need a lot of talent at the corner position in a Cover 2. You need guys willing to make the smart plays. Plus it doesn't matter who's out there if your D-line can't get pressure on the QB, NFL caliber WRs will get open if given 5 seconds.

McGahee? Ha. We've replaced him with someone already who can probably come in and rush for 990 yards and he'll catch some balls out of the backfield. Where was that in McGahees' game? Oh yeah, it didn't exist.

That leaves us Fletch....

I haven't really liked the guy much and was glad that he spurned the Brownies when he hit FA last time. But facts are facts, he was 3rd in the NFL in tackles. He had INTs. He scored TDs. That's a lot to try and replace, almost unfair really to rookie Paulie Pos. I won't even get into that he easily was the heart and soul of this defense.

In closing, I think we're good on replacements for the guys we jettisoned, but the loss of Fletch has me a little worried.

[gr8slayer]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Fletch is going to end up being the only guy we will miss on Defense.

[justasportsfan]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Y eah, here's the difference- when Kelly came back from his injury, he played better than Reich. At no point was it ever clear that Reich was better than Kelly.

You said the game tapes suggest Ellison played better than Spikes. Well, if Spikes started for a few games after coming back and never equalled Ellison's level of play, then he didn't lose his job to injury- he lost it to being outplayed. if you're suggesting that Jauron put a worse player on the field so it didn't create the appearance of a starter losing his job to injury, that's just asinine.
?

Uh- NO. Remember the Greatest comeback game, Reich was definitely the better qb. There were write-ups that he should start.

where's Spikes now if he was so much better than Ellison? I guess the coaches decided Ellison "in his first year" can replace him.

Well our DL sucked on paper in 2005 and 2006 too- how did that work out?

actually on paper our D was awsome in 2005 . We just had the no. 2 D the season before . So I guess my point is, paper don't mean squat.

[OpIv37]

Re: The media is obsessed with big names

Uh- NO. Remember the Greatest comeback game, Reich was definitely the better qb. There were write-ups that he should start.

where's Spikes now if he was so much better than Ellison? I guess the coaches decided Ellison "in his first year" can replace him.

actually on paper our D was awsome in 2005 . We just had the no. 2 D the season before . So I guess my point is, paper don't mean squat.

before 2005 I said our DL was going to get owned without Pat Williams, so i was able to see it.

Reich played one awesome game in back-up duty. A starter shouldn't lose his starting job because of one great game. But you're saying Ellison was better and Ellison played in pretty much all the games, even situationally after Spikes' return. If at that point Ellison is better, he should start, regardless of Spikes' injury. Spikes was on the field and Ellison on the bench way too much last year to reasonably conclude that the coaches have that much confidence in Ellison. Also, you're forgetting one other thing: Spikes WANTED to leave and you cited that as a major reason in defending the decision to trade him. In fact, I believe I recall you saying that you wouldn't have traded Spikes if he had wanted to stay.

So, at this point we definitely don't have the information to reasonably conclude that the coaches feel Ellison is an improvement over Spikes. It's possible but we're just not in a position to know.