WTF does this team plan on doing at Guard?

[more cowbell]

Seriously. I understand letting Levitre walk for the amount of money he got from TEN...IF WE USED THE MONEY ON IMPACT PLAYERS AT POSITIONS OF NEED. They let a reliable backup walk away too, leaving us with the often-injured Urbik and zero depth or starters for the left side. David Snow? Colin Brown? Sam Young? Good lord...

I would be FINE with us taking a guard to plug in and start in round 2...but we have way to many holes...and should take a LB or WR there (Assuming we do not lose that pick trading up for a QB).

Leave it to these buffoons to take one of the few "strengths" of the team...which was built "their way" and create a hole by making absolutely no effort to retain our own player(s).

This team SUCKS.

[bosshogg21]

Prob a bunch of Undrafted free agents will be starting for us that no one wanted. This approach to the way they've done things in free agency is really bizarre based on Russ Brandon's no stone unturned speech. I definitely expected more.

[clumping platelets]

Warmack at #8 :cp:

[better days]

Warmack at #8 :cp:

Makes all the sense in the World. Create a hole where none existed by letting Levitre walk, then WASTE the #8 pick in the draft to fill it.

I was told that Levitre would be easy to replace by someone CHEAP. Well, the #8 pick is a heavy price to pay & down the road after the Rookie contract is finished, that #8 pick will be asking for more money than Levitre got.

[YardRat]

I'm looking forward to seeing what some of these young guys bring to the table, especially if we get Warmack. Don't discount another signing, like B.Moore, before FA is over.

[X-Era]

1) Start a rookie like Brian Winters
2) Start Colin Brown
3) Sign a Urbik/Pears like FA on the cheap

[better days]

I'm looking forward to seeing what some of these young guys bring to the table, especially if we get Warmack. Don't discount another signing, like B.Moore, before FA is over.

So you are advocating WASTING the #8 pick on a GUARD? A position so easily filled by someone CHEAP?

I think a much better use of that pick would be a position NOT so easily filled myself, like QUARTERBACK.

[ServoBillieves]

Wow, no one has said "Let's move Glenn inside!" yet.

[Jan Reimers]

Makes all the sense in the World. Create a hole where none existed by letting Levitre walk, then WASTE the #8 pick in the draft to fill it.

I was told that Levitre would be easy to replace by someone CHEAP. Well, the #8 pick is a heavy price to pay & down the road after the Rookie contract is finished, that #8 pick will be asking for more money than Levitre got.
Totally agree. We have Mack Truck sized holes all over this team, including QB, WR and LB. Why would we waste an 8th overall pick on a position so unimportant that we let a starter and a reliable backup/sometimes starter walk? Let's use our high picks on positions of desperate need, and get a guard in free agency or with a low pick.

[X-Era]

Wow, no one has said "Let's move Glenn inside!" yet.Why? So we can then draft a new LT when we have one that we like already?

LT is much harder to fill than LG.

If were moving OT's to LG, let's try Hairston there. He's played LT before and has decent feet, maybe he can be a very good LG.

[DraftBoy]

Draft Fisher/Joeckel/Johnson kick Glenn inside. Upgrade LT and LG in the long term and be done with it. Also get to have your pick of QB's in Round 2.

[kingJofNYC]

Draft Fisher/Joeckel/Johnson kick Glenn inside. Upgrade LT and LG in the long term and be done with it. Also get to have your pick of QB's in Round 2.

Probably the best solution, can also kick Glenn to RT if they find a capable G in the later rounds, Pears stinks.

[T-Long]

Don't understand why everyone wants to move Glenn inside. He played quite well in his rookie season at left tackle, why would we move him? Pick up a serviceable guard and get a RT, Glenn is just fine over there.

[coastal]

Well according to Nix... We're all set at tackle.

So.. everyone's favorite offseason meme of "kicking Glenn into guard" may very well come to pass.

At this point it doesn't really matter now... does it?

[ServoBillieves]

Why? So we can then draft a new LT when we have one that we like already?

LT is much harder to fill than LG.

If were moving OT's to LG, let's try Hairston there. He's played LT before and has decent feet, maybe he can be a very good LG.

It's constantly brought up (see the post below yours) and IMHO Glenn should just stay put.

[Historian]

Leave it to these buffoons to take one of the few "strengths" of the team...which was built "their way" and create a hole by making absolutely no effort to retain our own player(s).


Spot on.

Our run game was the only positive last year, and now even that is in question for 2013.

I sure hope to hell these guys know what they're doing.

[Mahdi]

SIGN ANDRE SMITH.

If we only do this in FA I would be happy with it.

Andre Smith can be a PB guard and would make a nasty duo with Glenn at LT.

[DraftBoy]

Don't understand why everyone wants to move Glenn inside. He played quite well in his rookie season at left tackle, why would we move him? Pick up a serviceable guard and get a RT, Glenn is just fine over there.

Because well or good isn't good enough. He was considered the best OG in the country in college, his game is best suited as road grading OG. Can he play LT? Yes he proved that this year but why not put your players in the best position for them to succeed? If you get a shot at say Joeckel at 8, do we really want to pass on that value because we don't want to kick Glenn inside or even to RT?

[stuckincincy]

SIGN ANDRE SMITH.

If we only do this in FA I would be happy with it.

Andre Smith can be a PB guard and would make a nasty duo with Glenn at LT.


I can't see Andre Smith pulling...he'd probably break his dainty feet - again.

[trapezeus]

the way i see this playing out is that we are going to start hearing a lot more about how marrone was a former line man, and he coached the line, and that he had probowlers play under him.

This will allow the team to say, "we can get guards and tackles whenever. We'll coach them up." We may get a couple, but we won't have depth. Somene will get seriously hurt, mildly injured guys will need to learn a new position in the week before game, and there will be no continuity.

after year 1 where our QB is sacked at will and the run game stalls, we'll hear
1. CJ had a poor year. RB's can be found. We let him walk.
2. injuries really took their toll, there was good stuff in there.

Year 2 will start, our rookie QB will be shell shocked, he'll have a decent training camp, we'll have a few more bodies. we'll have higher some assistant coach you've never heard of. Some how he is supposed to be a diamond in the rough. Again, we'll leave the lines mostly the same promising that injuries were the problem.

Year 2 will end with 50% of this board convinced the QB sucks, and 50% blaming the line. Someone will say, "it's year three now, it'll come together"

Year 3 starts with a big naming signing to get us over the hump. First round draft of an RB to enhance our struggling running game. we will be told this is going to help the QB buy time and really see the field. "this is the make or break it year for Marrone and I like how he went from 2 wins to 6 wins. And man we only lost to the patriots by 15 and 25 points in the two games last season. I feel playoffs"

Year three we all see that line play is worse than it was in 2012. Levitre has gone on to perform well....again, and is now considered a steal at his contract price. by week5 everyone will complain about "what are we paying for". Then at the end of the year, when we can marrone and feel like there is a shot at change, Russ will be promoted to Grand Poomba. He will continue to move people around and take flights in January to Arizona as a sacrifice of turning over every stone.

I would gladly have this post thrown in my face in three years when the bills win the superbowl and told that i suck as a fan. but i just don't see any other way that this team travels but sideways and in the steps it laid previously.

Russ has got to go for there to be a winning football team in buffalo.

[EDS]

the way i see this playing out is that we are going to start hearing a lot more about how marrone was a former line man, and he coached the line, and that he had probowlers play under him.

This will allow the team to say, "we can get guards and tackles whenever. We'll coach them up." We may get a couple, but we won't have depth. Somene will get seriously hurt, mildly injured guys will need to learn a new position in the week before game, and there will be no continuity.

after year 1 where our QB is sacked at will and the run game stalls, we'll hear
1. CJ had a poor year. RB's can be found. We let him walk.
2. injuries really took their toll, there was good stuff in there.

Year 2 will start, our rookie QB will be shell shocked, he'll have a decent training camp, we'll have a few more bodies. we'll have higher some assistant coach you've never heard of. Some how he is supposed to be a diamond in the rough. Again, we'll leave the lines mostly the same promising that injuries were the problem.

Year 2 will end with 50% of this board convinced the QB sucks, and 50% blaming the line. Someone will say, "it's year three now, it'll come together"

Year 3 starts with a big naming signing to get us over the hump. First round draft of an RB to enhance our struggling running game. we will be told this is going to help the QB buy time and really see the field. "this is the make or break it year for Marrone and I like how he went from 2 wins to 6 wins. And man we only lost to the patriots by 15 and 25 points in the two games last season. I feel playoffs"

Year three we all see that line play is worse than it was in 2012. Levitre has gone on to perform well....again, and is now considered a steal at his contract price. by week5 everyone will complain about "what are we paying for". Then at the end of the year, when we can marrone and feel like there is a shot at change, Russ will be promoted to Grand Poomba. He will continue to move people around and take flights in January to Arizona as a sacrifice of turning over every stone.

I would gladly have this post thrown in my face in three years when the bills win the superbowl and told that i suck as a fan. but i just don't see any other way that this team travels but sideways and in the steps it laid previously.

Russ has got to go for there to be a winning football team in buffalo.

That is almost exactly what has happened over the past 13 or so years - 3-4 year cycles of hope and crap.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Use the #8 on Chance Warmack? Move Glenn inside? These are ridiculous ideas. When Levitre walked, all we heard was that Guards were easy to find so you shouldn't "waste" big money on them. So if the difference between on off-the-street guard and a great guard is so negligent, why in god's name would you use the #8 or #41 pick to fill that hole?

In your best case scenario Warmack or Glenn become dominant left guards, which means they'll want dominant guard money, which means we should let them walk.

Either Guard is a worthwhile position to invest in or it isn't. If it's worth a top 10 pick, it's worth an elite contract if it pans out.

[ServoBillieves]

SIGN ANDRE SMITH.

If we only do this in FA I would be happy with it.

Andre Smith can be a PB guard and would make a nasty duo with Glenn at LT.

YES! LET'S MOVE BOTH TACKLES TO GUARD! LET 'EM FIGHT IT OUT!

[Mahdi]

YES! LET'S MOVE BOTH TACKLES TO GUARD! LET 'EM FIGHT IT OUT!

No, Glenn at T. Smith at G.

- - - Updated - - -


I can't see Andre Smith pulling...he'd probably break his dainty feet - again.

He played RT last two years. He can play G easily and he can move.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

No, Glenn at T. Smith at G.

- - - Updated - - -



He played RT last two years. He can play G easily and he can move.

The entire reason Smith isn't signed is because he wants tackle money. I don't know why he'd be interested in taking less money to come here and move to a completely different position.

This is, of course, assuming that he's actually turned a corner in his career and isn't just a fatbody who played hard in a contract year.

[stuckincincy]

No, Glenn at T. Smith at G.

- - - Updated - - -



He played RT last two years. He can play G easily and he can move.

I've watched his entire (truncated) career. Why do you feel he can "easily" play G? :dream:


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/players/playerpage/1255104/andre-smith

[mysticsoto]

Guards don't go quickly. We can still get the 3rd or 4th best guard w/our 3rd rd pick or a serviceable one in the 4th round. There is NO way we should be taking a guard with our #8. That's a ******ed option to throw out there - almost as bad as those that wanted us to draft Nugent (Kicker) in the 1st rd a couple of yrs ago!!!

The 1st rd HAS to be QB, WR or LB!!!

[Mahdi]

I've watched his entire (truncated) career. Why do you feel he can "easily" play G? :dream:


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/players/playerpage/1255104/andre-smith

Because he is huge, powerful and has good enough feet to play inside. I think G is his best position.

[DraftBoy]

Use the #8 on Chance Warmack? Move Glenn inside? These are ridiculous ideas. When Levitre walked, all we heard was that Guards were easy to find so you shouldn't "waste" big money on them. So if the difference between on off-the-street guard and a great guard is so negligent, why in god's name would you use the #8 or #41 pick to fill that hole?

In your best case scenario Warmack or Glenn become dominant left guards, which means they'll want dominant guard money, which means we should let them walk.

Either Guard is a worthwhile position to invest in or it isn't. If it's worth a top 10 pick, it's worth an elite contract if it pans out.

Because I want an elite franchise LT and an elite LG...? Losing Levitre just made that easier.

[cookie G]

the way i see this playing out is that we are going to start hearing a lot more about how marrone was a former line man, and he coached the line, and that he had probowlers play under him.

This will allow the team to say, "we can get guards and tackles whenever. We'll coach them up." We may get a couple, but we won't have depth. Somene will get seriously hurt, mildly injured guys will need to learn a new position in the week before game, and there will be no continuity.

Ah yes, the Mouse McNally approach. I loved that idea. Give the guy a steady stream of Terrance Pennington/Aaron Merz/Bennie Anderson and say "coach 'em up".

He'd say things like...I can only do so much, I'm not a miracle worker.

To which some would say, "well, how good is he really if he can't coach those guys up?"

Good luck, Mr. Marrone.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Because I want an elite franchise LT and an elite LG...? Losing Levitre just made that easier.

Everyone wants an elite Left Guard, my point is that nobody seems to be willing to pay for an elite left guard.

So, follow your plan to it's logical conclusion. In your best case scenario, Glenn moves inside and becomes an elite left guard. What happens when his contract comes due? You said it yourself:

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php/217349-Levitre-says-the-Bills-haven-t-made-him-an-offer?p=3759513&viewfull=1#post3759513

Absolutely no surprise here. Sucks he's likely gone but no OG is worth what he'll likely get on the market.

So when Glenn's deal is up, you've got an elite left guard, who's also proven he can handle left tackle. That's a huge, big money free agent. So now what? Let him walk because "No OG is worth" elite guard money?

[better days]

Draft Fisher/Joeckel/Johnson kick Glenn inside. Upgrade LT and LG in the long term and be done with it. Also get to have your pick of QB's in Round 2.


You mean get your pick of the mediocre QBS in the 2nd rnd. Especially at #41. ALL of the GOOD QBS will be drafted before then. And the talk now is at least 3 QBs will be drafted in the FIRST RND.

[stuckincincy]

So when Glenn's deal is up, you've got an elite left guard, who's also proven he can handle left tackle. That's a huge, big money free agent. So now what? Let him walk because "No OG is worth" elite guard money?

If we think player costs are high now, wait until 2014 when the cap rises. Levitre will look like a bargain.

Plenty of teams are sitting on the sidelines, and not signing FAs. The union vets are *****ing about that, but too bad. They *****ed about high $ rookie signings, and they got a rookie cap. So now, owners wait for the draft and lift a leg on the complaining, carping vets.

I'm glad - players' greed shot them in their (ignorant) foot. A lot of folks rattle on about owners, but the players are the same - oozing self-interest, and the customer be damned.


BUF's problem is only having 6 bites at the rookie apple. They would be nuts to do anything that costs them picks, IMO.

[DraftBoy]

Everyone wants an elite Left Guard, my point is that nobody seems to be willing to pay for an elite left guard.

So, follow your plan to it's logical conclusion. In your best case scenario, Glenn moves inside and becomes an elite left guard. What happens when his contract comes due? You said it yourself:

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php/217349-Levitre-says-the-Bills-haven-t-made-him-an-offer?p=3759513&viewfull=1#post3759513


So when Glenn's deal is up, you've got an elite left guard, who's also proven he can handle left tackle. That's a huge, big money free agent. So now what? Let him walk because "No OG is worth" elite guard money?

Read Tim Graham's piece, easy to avoid.

[DraftBoy]

You mean get your pick of the mediocre QBS in the 2nd rnd. Especially at #41. ALL of the GOOD QBS will be drafted before then. And the talk now is at least 3 QBs will be drafted in the FIRST RND.

Yes that's exactly what I mean.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Read Tim Graham's piece, easy to avoid.

Uh, which one? You didn't even give me a title or a subject. Tim Graham "Easy to avoid" doesn't bring up any hits on google.

[DraftBoy]

Uh, which one? You didn't even give me a title or a subject. Tim Graham "Easy to avoid" doesn't bring up any hits on google.

Sorry thought I had linked it in the post;
http://blogs.buffalonews.com/press-coverage/2013/03/is-buffalos-front-office-allowing-itself-to-get-out-leveraged.html?ref=bmh


In other words, the Bills would have gotten Levitre to stay for a lot less than the six years, $46.8 million he accepted from the Tennessee Titans had they offered him some security before he completed the final year of his rookie contract.

[psubills62]

If they're going to use the money elsewhere on a legit core player (e.g. Eric Wood, Jairus Byrd), then fine. If they're just going to blow it on some shmuck and give Urbik $7m/year and call it a bargain, then screw that.

[Oaf]

Makes all the sense in the World. Create a hole where none existed by letting Levitre walk, then WASTE the #8 pick in the draft to fill it.


http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php/217076-CB-suspects-S-UFA-addition

[Buddo]

Nobody has mentioned Sanders in this thread as yet, so I might as well. He must be a possibility as a Guard.
I know DB doesn't think he's up to it, but I wouldn't be that surprised if Hairston didn't make an appearance there, either, or maybe even Pears, now that he's got himself bigger.
I wonder if they are going to do something like that, if they don't actually move Urbik to LG and use someone else at RG, which is another possibility that nobody has mentioned.

[YardRat]

So you are advocating WASTING the #8 pick on a GUARD? A position so easily filled by someone CHEAP?

I think a much better use of that pick would be a position NOT so easily filled myself, like QUARTERBACK.

I wouldn't be upset if Warmack was the pick, but my personal preference is defense. I'm absolutely OK with using a first on an offensive lineman, as often as the opportunity presents itself if they are the BAP at the time of the pick. Linemen, especially guards, have better potential for contributing immediately, and also long term over the length of their contract. QB's are too risky, especially when taking into account the quality (or more accurately lack there-of) of this particular class.

[better days]

I wouldn't be upset if Warmack was the pick, but my personal preference is defense. I'm absolutely OK with using a first on an offensive lineman, as often as the opportunity presents itself if they are the BAP at the time of the pick. Linemen, especially guards, have better potential for contributing immediately, and also long term over the length of their contract. QB's are too risky, especially when taking into account the quality (or more accurately lack there-of) of this particular class.

Thinking like that is what keeps a team MEDIOCRE. The Bills had a GOOD LG In Levitre, a guy that NEVER missed a game.

I don't care how cheap Wormack is or how good he can play. I will bet that..............

A) He will not play his entire Rookie contract without missing a game

B) If he does play well, he will want far MORE money than Levitre when his Rookie contract is up.

And C, if you don't realize a #8 draft pick is worth more than a few Million Dollars you are just STUPID.

You have said Guard is a position easily filled by someone cheap, yet you would WASTE a TOP 10 pick on one STUPID STUPID STUPID STUPID.

[DraftBoy]

Nobody has mentioned Sanders in this thread as yet, so I might as well. He must be a possibility as a Guard.
I know DB doesn't think he's up to it, but I wouldn't be that surprised if Hairston didn't make an appearance there, either, or maybe even Pears, now that he's got himself bigger.
I wonder if they are going to do something like that, if they don't actually move Urbik to LG and use someone else at RG, which is another possibility that nobody has mentioned.

Sanders at OG? I'd be all for that along with Hairston. I think they are all options to kick inside. I think Glenn's the best option but you cant move him without drafting a LT to replace him.

[cookie G]

Nobody has mentioned Sanders in this thread as yet, so I might as well. He must be a possibility as a Guard.
I know DB doesn't think he's up to it, but I wouldn't be that surprised if Hairston didn't make an appearance there, either, or maybe even Pears, now that he's got himself bigger.
I wonder if they are going to do something like that, if they don't actually move Urbik to LG and use someone else at RG, which is another possibility that nobody has mentioned.

Ask and ye shall receive.

http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-1/OL-Sanders-close-to-seizing-second-chance/187cf7c6-92e7-4ce3-a483-e3387f7afae2

Yep, a 5th round draft choice, a project to begin with, who missed his entire rookie year, rehabbing not one, but 2 hip operations ...plugged into a new position.

That's definitely a Bills' move.

[Bill Cody]

If you draft a guard at 8 he'd better be John Hannah. I don't see it. And I don't see us moving Glenn. Plan A: draft Geno Plan B: trade down Plan C: draft a pass rusher

[Buffalo Billy Bison]

They will add one in the draft probably in the 4th or 5th round and bring in 2 or 3 of the undrafted free agents just before camp. If they could find a good LT in the draft they could move Glenn to LG, his natural position and that solves that problem then get some guy as a backup to Glenn if he goes down.

[Mahdi]

I think we all need to put this Andy Levitre thing into perspective.

Personally I am happy we didn't pay Levitre that contract because you are not going to build a Championship team by signing Guards.

A very good example is the Vikings OL. They have 2 first round picks at OT and 3 6th round players at LG, C and RG. Interior players are a dime a dozen. If you are strong at the Tackle spots you can find very good players to plug in on the interior of your line and still get production out of your RB and good pass pro.

If I was a GM I would never sign a guard to a big money deal. You build a good team with a few ingredients......

QB, LT, 2 pass rushers, difference maker in the secondary, playmaking #1 WR, underneath WR (either slot receiver or TE) and one impact LB. These are the only players I would pay big contracts to.

Everyone else is a filler. Exceptions are playmaking DTs who elevate the play of average DEs, elite RBs, hall of fame G like Larry Allen.

[Buddo]

Ask and ye shall receive.

http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-1/OL-Sanders-close-to-seizing-second-chance/187cf7c6-92e7-4ce3-a483-e3387f7afae2

Yep, a 5th round draft choice, a project to begin with, who missed his entire rookie year, rehabbing not one, but 2 hip operations ...plugged into a new position.

That's definitely a Bills' move.

It's also a move that happens throughout the NFL with certain position groups. OTs in particular.
Also happens a lot with DBs. Lest people forget, Byrd was a CB out of college.
The general approach is one of see what they can do outside, and if it isn't good enough, you move them inside.
Whilst it's not unfair to be particularly sceptical of the Bills organization as a whole, there are areas where the continual harping on about the past, simply doesn't reflect accepted NFL practices. This happens to be one of those. ;)
We can debate 'til the cows come home whether or not such a move should be necessary, but the bottom line of moving Sanders inside, is that it's both common, and acceptable NFL practice, when looking at guys along the O-Line.
Btw, thanks for the link. ;)

[justasportsfan]

You need to bring out your history books to know what Marrone plans.

He will either use Carrington/Troupe or bring in an undrafted DT and convert them them into a guard like he did with Brandon Moore.

Problem solved! :bigwave:

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Sorry thought I had linked it in the post;
http://blogs.buffalonews.com/press-coverage/2013/03/is-buffalos-front-office-allowing-itself-to-get-out-leveraged.html?ref=bmh

Ok, so your plan is to try to lock them up for below market value. But it takes two to tango, so what happens if Glenn pulls a Flacco and rolls the dice on his contract year and wins? Would you let him walk?

[PTI]

Jamarcus Russell!!

[EDS]

I think we all need to put this Andy Levitre thing into perspective.

Personally I am happy we didn't pay Levitre that contract because you are not going to build a Championship team by signing Guards.

A very good example is the Vikings OL. They have 2 first round picks at OT and 3 6th round players at LG, C and RG. Interior players are a dime a dozen. If you are strong at the Tackle spots you can find very good players to plug in on the interior of your line and still get production out of your RB and good pass pro.

If I was a GM I would never sign a guard to a big money deal. You build a good team with a few ingredients......

QB, LT, 2 pass rushers, difference maker in the secondary, playmaking #1 WR, underneath WR (either slot receiver or TE) and one impact LB. These are the only players I would pay big contracts to.

Everyone else is a filler. Exceptions are playmaking DTs who elevate the play of average DEs, elite RBs, hall of fame G like Larry Allen.

For the record, the Vikings center was the 6th highest paid player on their team in 2012. Also, teams such as the Giants, Ravens and Patriots have done well in recent years with highly paid interior offensive linemen.

[Mahdi]

For the record, the Vikings center was the 6th highest paid player on their team in 2012. Also, teams such as the Giants, Ravens and Patriots have done well in recent years with highly paid interior offensive linemen.

Good point.

Although Giants have Manning and Brady which makes everything easier. And Ravens let Ben Grubbs go and replaced him with a cheaper player. Same with their young C, Brown, they replaced him with Birk who was also cheaper.

I think a lot of the smart teams from now on into the future will be cautious of where they spend. Its a pass first league now with lots of spread formations and the ball comes out quick. You don't need to pay interior linemen loads of cash to do that.

WRs with movement skills, OTs, QBs, pass rushers and DBs is where the focus will be. So rather than pay a guard 7 mil, you pay to get another top cover corner or safety. You need 3 or 4 good CBs now, you need 3-4 good WRs, you need a good TE, and you need at least 3 guys who can rush the passer.

Those realities are going to reduce the market for Gs. That is why Levitre wasn't exactly getting a whole lot of play. He had us and the Titans and Titans overpaid.

[DraftBoy]

Ok, so your plan is to try to lock them up for below market value. But it takes two to tango, so what happens if Glenn pulls a Flacco and rolls the dice on his contract year and wins? Would you let him walk?

I answered this question already. Traditionally speaking if you are willing to take care of your players early you don't run into those issues.

QB's tend to be the exception to the rule due to the gross amount of pay they make. They need the market to get better annually with the next big deal.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Good point.

Although Giants have Manning and Brady which makes everything easier. And Ravens let Ben Grubbs go and replaced him with a cheaper player. Same with their young C, Brown, they replaced him with Birk who was also cheaper.

I think a lot of the smart teams from now on into the future will be cautious of where they spend. Its a pass first league now with lots of spread formations and the ball comes out quick. You don't need to pay interior linemen loads of cash to do that.

WRs with movement skills, OTs, QBs, pass rushers and DBs is where the focus will be. So rather than pay a guard 7 mil, you pay to get another top cover corner or safety. You need 3 or 4 good CBs now, you need 3-4 good WRs, you need a good TE, and you need at least 3 guys who can rush the passer.

Those realities are going to reduce the market for Gs. That is why Levitre wasn't exactly getting a whole lot of play. He had us and the Titans and Titans overpaid.

Are you kidding? The market for Guards has been intense. Levitre had multiple suitors (https://www.tennessean.com/article/20130312/SPORTS01/130312010/Titans-add-guard-tight-end-free-agency-begins) and several of the top guards were gone in the first 90 minutes of free agency.

I don't know why you keep harping pass rushers and neglecting the guys who block them. The model where the pass rush is just two DEs coming around the outside of the tackles is simplistic and outdated. If you have a weak spot on the line, defenses will exploit it.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

I answered this question already.

So your answer is yes, you would let him walk?


Traditionally speaking if you are willing to take care of your players early you don't run into those issues.

Sometimes you do, sometimes you open up new issues -Fitzpatrick's extension was mentioned in that article with good reason. They were proactive there and did get a "below market" deal for a starting QB, he just completely failed to live up to it. You take risks either way.

[Mahdi]

Are you kidding? The market for Guards has been intense. Levitre had multiple suitors (https://www.tennessean.com/article/20130312/SPORTS01/130312010/Titans-add-guard-tight-end-free-agency-begins) and several of the top guards were gone in the first 90 minutes of free agency.

I don't know why you keep harping pass rushers and neglecting the guys who block them. The model where the pass rush is just two DEs coming around the outside of the tackles is simplistic and outdated. If you have a weak spot on the line, defenses will exploit it.

Im not suggesting having a weak spot on the line. What I'm saying is that the market will readjust for Gs. The big contracts they have gotten lately will not happen going forward.

Bucs paid Nicks crazy money, he got injured and they continued to run the ball just as well without him. Saints offense was not worse without Nicks either and he is the best G in football.

All I'm saying is that the market for Gs won't be as lucrative in the future. Why pay a G 8 mil per when I can get a second top CB for the same price? Or even a really good OT? Or a solid WR?

Just doesn't add up in today's game...

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Im not suggesting having a weak spot on the line. What I'm saying is that the market will readjust for Gs. The big contracts they have gotten lately will not happen going forward.

Bucs paid Nicks crazy money, he got injured and they continued to run the ball just as well without him.

You're assuming they wouldn't have run the ball better with him. Truly excellent players can make up for weaknesses elsewhere. Big Ben didn't really need a great line in Pittsburgh because he's ridiculous and shrugs off hits all day. Brady made it to an AFC title game with Reche Caldwell and Jabar Gaffney as his top wideouts. But both of them played better when they did have help.


Saints offense was not worse without Nicks either and he is the best G in football.

Uh, because they signed Grubbs. Remember, the guy you claimed was expendable for being too expensive? When you let a $9million pro bowl guard go to sign a $7 million pro bowl guard, I don't think that proves what you think it proves.


All I'm saying is that the market for Gs won't be as lucrative in the future. Why pay a G 8 mil per when I can get a second top CB for the same price? Or even a really good OT? Or a solid WR?

Just doesn't add up in today's game...

You think the NFL has changed dramatically in less than two weeks? Back from when Levitre was being chased by multiple teams and got 46 million?

[cookie G]

It's also a move that happens throughout the NFL with certain position groups. OTs in particular.
Also happens a lot with DBs. Lest people forget, Byrd was a CB out of college.
The general approach is one of see what they can do outside, and if it isn't good enough, you move them inside.
Whilst it's not unfair to be particularly sceptical of the Bills organization as a whole, there are areas where the continual harping on about the past, simply doesn't reflect accepted NFL practices. This happens to be one of those. ;)
We can debate 'til the cows come home whether or not such a move should be necessary, but the bottom line of moving Sanders inside, is that it's both common, and acceptable NFL practice, when looking at guys along the O-Line.
Btw, thanks for the link. ;)

Changing positions is the least of his problems, but one of them.

He was a 5th round draft choice and a project for reasons. One of those reasons was a lack of lower body strength, which was exposed during the Senior Bowl, when he was bull rushed effectively during drills.

Ok, so he needs a good weight training program for a year or 2.
But he injures both hips at the beginning of the season, before any weight training would have been effective.
Now, 5 months after 2 surgeries, he hasn't been doing anything to strengthen his lower body much (He couldn't).
According to the article, he's just beginning to get into lower body weight training.

So again...the plan should be to take this kid with a below NFL lower body strength, who was questionable in holding his own against bull rushers, who couldn't do anything to improve himself in the past season, who is most likely weaker than he was last year...

and take him from blocking 250-270 lb. DE's and move him to a position where he will regularly take on 300-330 lb. DT's, and expect him to hold up?

That's an accepted NFL practice? Among the bad teams maybe. Or those who think, "hey, he's 6'5" and over 300 lbs, that's really all you need".

But then, this would be nothing new for the Bills. I'm sure the new team president does.

That's why D. Bell became the starting LT after Peters was dumped.

[DraftBoy]

So your answer is yes, you would let him walk?

Yes.


Sometimes you do, sometimes you open up new issues -Fitzpatrick's extension was mentioned in that article with good reason. They were proactive there and did get a "below market" deal for a starting QB, he just completely failed to live up to it. You take risks either way.

Fitz extension was more reactionary then trying to beat the market. He was still a sub .500 (?) starting QB.

[NOT THE DUDE...]

david snow baby!

[jdaltroy5]

I don't know why they didn't lock up Levitre last year.

People that think, "Oh he's just a guard, he can easily be replaced" need to take their head out of their ass.

The OL has been in shamble for years. As soon as we started investing some ACTUAL high draft picks into it, lo and behold, the OL starts to look good.

[tampabay25690]

Its a Guard and its still early.
Could draft 1 or we will probably pick 1 up still.

[YardRat]

Thinking like that is what keeps a team MEDIOCRE. The Bills had a GOOD LG In Levitre, a guy that NEVER missed a game.

I don't care how cheap Wormack is or how good he can play. I will bet that..............

A) He will not play his entire Rookie contract without missing a game

B) If he does play well, he will want far MORE money than Levitre when his Rookie contract is up.

And C, if you don't realize a #8 draft pick is worth more than a few Million Dollars you are just STUPID.

You have said Guard is a position easily filled by someone cheap, yet you would WASTE a TOP 10 pick on one STUPID STUPID STUPID STUPID.

What keeps a team mediocre is over-paying for average talent, piss-poor drafting in general, swinging and missing on high draft picks because of need (*cough* QB at #8 *cough*), and piss poor coaching.

It's never stupid to draft big men early, unless you completely whiff a la Mike Williams.

As I clearly stated, I would prefer defense at #8, but if Warmack is the choice I won't *****.

[YardRat]

I don't know why they didn't lock up Levitre last year.

I agree with this to a point...if you've got a guy you want to keep then try and re-sign him well before free agency.

Then again, we don't know if the team wanted to keep him, especially with the possibility looming of a change in the coaching staff, or if they tried to keep him and were told to piss up a rope because Levitre and his agent wanted to test the open market.

Levitre is above average, and a good starter, as long as he's in the right system that suits his strengths. If Marrone is bringing more of a power-rushing attack to the table, Andy simply doesn't fit and everybody would probably be *****ing about the team spending money on him.

[better days]

As I clearly stated, I would prefer defense at #8, but if Warmack is the choice I won't *****.

You won't ***** if the Bills WASTE a TOP 10 PICK on a Guard, but you *****ED because a GOOD Guard wanted to be paid.

Like I said a #8 draft pick is worth more than a few Million dollars.

What do you think happens when the Guard drafted at #8 gets his new contract? Drafted in the TOP 10, he will want MUCH more than Levitre got.

[YardRat]

You won't ***** if the Bills WASTE a TOP 10 PICK on a Guard, but you *****ED because a GOOD Guard wanted to be paid.

Like I said a #8 draft pick is worth more than a few Million dollars.

What do you think happens when the Guard drafted at #8 gets his new contract? Drafted in the TOP 10, he will want MUCH more than Levitre got.

You're assuming it would be a waste, and Levitre isn't worth 8mil per. He just isn't that good. Maybe Warmack will be :D

Not really. 3-3.5mil tops, average. Rather pay that to Warmack than 8per over the next four years for a finesse guy like Levitre.

Depends on how well he plays, and for how long, and how healthy he stays. If he has an average career for four seasons than starts looking for Top 5 money, than he can walk also. Guards are easy to find.

[better days]

You're assuming it would be a waste, and Levitre isn't worth 8mil per. He just isn't that good. Maybe Warmack will be :D


If he has an average career for four seasons than starts looking for Top 5 money, than he can walk also. Guards are easy to find.

And that is my point about maintaining MEDIOCRITY. As a TOP 10 pick there is no question He will ask for TOP 10 MONEY even if he is not much if any better than Levitre. You say yourself that Guards are easy to find so why waste a TOP ten pick on one STUPID.

If you can't understand that the #8 pick is worth the few extra Million it would have cost to keep Levitre, you just don't have a clue.

[YardRat]

And that is my point about maintaining MEDIOCRITY. As a TOP 10 pick there is no question He will ask for TOP 10 MONEY even if he is not much if any better than Levitre. You say yourself that Guards are easy to find so why waste a TOP ten pick on one STUPID.

If you can't understand that the #8 pick is worth the few extra Million it would have cost to keep Levitre, you just don't have a clue.

Leodis McKelvin was a #11, and he didn't ask for TOP 5 MONEY like Levitre did. Where a player is drafted has absolutely nothing to do with what he'll be looking for on his second contract. How he believes he performed and should be compensated for that performance does.

Levitre = 8mil per, #8 = 3 to 3.5per...I don't think you want to get into the math if you don't understand that. The two are mostly unrelated anyway as Levitre's contract has little to do with the rookie salary scale.

You wanted to re-sign Levitre, you don't want a guard at 8, you want a GOOD QB. I get it. To me, Levitre isn't worth it because that contract would have further restricted signing other players like McKelvin and Lawson, and possibly infringed on keeping Byrd. Can't pay everybody 8mil per, unless you're planning on only suiting up 16 guys total.

[better days]

Leodis McKelvin was a #11, and he didn't ask for TOP 5 MONEY like Levitre did. Where a player is drafted has absolutely nothing to do with what he'll be looking for on his second contract. How he believes he performed and should be compensated for that performance does.

Levitre = 8mil per, #8 = 3 to 3.5per...I don't think you want to get into the math if you don't understand that. The two are mostly unrelated anyway as Levitre's contract has little to do with the rookie salary scale.

You wanted to re-sign Levitre, you don't want a guard at 8, you want a GOOD QB. I get it. To me, Levitre isn't worth it because that contract would have further restricted signing other players like McKelvin and Lawson, and possibly infringed on keeping Byrd. Can't pay everybody 8mil per, unless you're planning on only suiting up 16 guys total.

The point is NOBODY including me thinks a Guard should be drafted in the TOP 10. You use HIGH draft picks to fill holes that are HARD to fill. And if you think Levitre is worth $5 Million, that means the Bills would have had to overspend $3 Million to keep him. So drafting another Guard at #8 puts a price tag on the #8 pick of $3 Million Dollars. That is peanuts for a TOP 10 pick. And anyone that does not think Levitre is worth $5 Million, all I can say is the Titans thought he was worth $8 Million.

[YardRat]

The point is NOBODY including me thinks a Guard should be drafted in the TOP 10. You use HIGH draft picks to fill holes that are HARD to fill. And if you think Levitre is worth $5 Million, that means the Bills would have had to overspend $3 Million to keep him. So drafting another Guard at #8 puts a price tag on the #8 pick of $3 Million Dollars. That is peanuts for a TOP 10 pick. And anyone that does not think Levitre is worth $5 Million, all I can say is the Titans thought he was worth $8 Million.

No, it's not peanuts, it's the going rate. Look up the contracts signed the last two seasons for the 9-11 picks.

[better days]

No, it's not peanuts, it's the going rate. Look up the contracts signed the last two seasons for the 9-11 picks.

I am talking about the VALUE of the #8 pick. NOT the money that pick would be paid. If teams were allowed to trade draft picks for money, I'm saying the draft pick would be worth much more than $3 Million.

[SABURZFAN]

Seriously. I understand letting Levitre walk for the amount of money he got from TEN...IF WE USED THE MONEY ON IMPACT PLAYERS AT POSITIONS OF NEED. They let a reliable backup walk away too, leaving us with the often-injured Urbik and zero depth or starters for the left side. David Snow? Colin Brown? Sam Young? Good lord...

I would be FINE with us taking a guard to plug in and start in round 2...but we have way to many holes...and should take a LB or WR there (Assuming we do not lose that pick trading up for a QB).

Leave it to these buffoons to take one of the few "strengths" of the team...which was built "their way" and create a hole by making absolutely no effort to retain our own player(s).

This team SUCKS.


draft Warmack. he'll step in and be a Day 1 starter. that's what this team NEEDS.

[SABURZFAN]

The point is NOBODY including me thinks a Guard should be drafted in the TOP 10. You use HIGH draft picks to fill holes that are HARD to fill.



this draft blows so drafting a Guard in the top 10 would be a great idea.

[YardRat]

I am talking about the VALUE of the #8 pick. NOT the money that pick would be paid. If teams were allowed to trade draft picks for money, I'm saying the draft pick would be worth much more than $3 Million.

Do you want to discuss this in a context that deals with reality, or in a fairy-tale world of make believe?

[SABURZFAN]

Do you want to discuss this in a context that deals with reality, or in a fairy-tale world of make believe?

he prefers the fairy tale world of make believe. see JP Lossman threads when he was the artist formerly known as yordad.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Yes.

So we've circled back around to you wanting elite left guard play without pay for elite left guard play. It's nice if you can get it, the Seahawks are benefitting from elite QB and DB play for 1/10th of its market value to name one example. But you can't have both for long.


Fitz extension was more reactionary then trying to beat the market. He was still a sub .500 (?) starting QB.
He was playing well in a contract year, so they extended him early. If Fitz' hadn't fallen off a cliff, it would have been great. But he did.

[better days]

Do you want to discuss this in a context that deals with reality, or in a fairy-tale world of make believe?

The REALITY is NO GUARD is worth a TOP 10 pick.

[better days]

he prefers the fairy tale world of make believe. see JP Lossman threads when he was the artist formerly known as yordad.

You are the one living in a fairy tale world because I have told you numerous times I am not that person, but you refuse to believe reality.

[YardRat]

The REALITY is NO GUARD is worth a TOP 10 pick.

And yet one is worth 8mil per?

[psubills62]

So we've circled back around to you wanting elite left guard play without pay for elite left guard play. It's nice if you can get it, the Seahawks are benefitting from elite QB and DB play for 1/10th of its market value to name one example. But you can't have both for long.

Not exactly the same thing. Look at Stevie Johnson - he's not an elite WR, but he's getting a little over 7m per year. He'd easily get more on the free agency market, as a similar tiered WR in Wallace just got about 10m per year. We locked him up early and now we're benefiting from it. I don't want to speak for DB, but I believe that's what he was talking about.

[better days]

And yet one is worth 8mil per?


Apparantly, because that is what the Titans paid Levitre. Lets see what pick Wormack is taken at, I will bet you it is NOT in the TOP 10.

[GingerP]

Apparantly, because that is what the Titans paid Levitre. Lets see what pick Wormack is taken at, I will bet you it is NOT in the TOP 10.

I don't think an OG has been drafted top 10. I think Steve Hutchinson was drafted at 17, and he was the highest. I know Leonard Davis
played OG after being drafted at #2, but the plan was for him to play OT and they eventually moved him there.

I do think OG have increasing value in the NFL. If you look at a good team, they inevitably have good OG play. Some really good teams pay top money for OG, like New England (Mankins), Baltimore (Yanda), Green Bay (Sitton), the Giants (Snee) and New Orleans (Evans & Grubbs). Others, like SF, have good OG that will be paid soon (Iupati).

If you look at a good team, they usually have good OG play, and teams are recognizing that more. This draft happens to have 2 OG who are considered top players in Warmack and Cooper. I think you could see both those guys go between 10 - 20. Teams are realizing OG are underrated.

[GingerP]

Apparantly, because that is what the Titans paid Levitre. Lets see what pick Wormack is taken at, I will bet you it is NOT in the TOP 10.

I would be surprised if Tennessee took him at 10. Their best offensive player is Chris Johnson and they are going to run the ball a lot. They have good OT, but have suffered from sub-par interior line play in recent seasons. They could take Warmack at 10 along with adding Levitre and really change their team. Would be a pretty good move.

I don't think the Bills take Warmack, but if they did they would be getting a good player they could plug in for years that would upgrade their OL and make them a better running team. There are worse moves they could make.

[YardRat]

I don't think an OG has been drafted top 10. I think Steve Hutchinson was drafted at 17, and he was the highest. I know Leonard Davis
played OG after being drafted at #2, but the plan was for him to play OT and they eventually moved him there.

In the modern era---

Chris Naole '97 NO
Dave Cadigan '88 NYJ
Eric Moore '88 NYG
John Rienstra '86 Pitt
Bill Fralic '85 Atl (#2 overall)
Chris Hinton '83 Denver (#4)
Mike Munchak '82 Hou (HOFer)
Ken Huff '75 Balt
John Hicks '74 NYG (#3)
John Hannah '73 NE (HOFer)
Royce Smith '72 NO

[GingerP]

In the modern era---

Chris Naole '97 NO
Dave Cadigan '88 NYJ
Eric Moore '88 NYG
John Rienstra '86 Pitt
Bill Fralic '85 Atl (#2 overall)
Chris Hinton '83 Denver (#4)
Mike Munchak '82 Hou (HOFer)
Ken Huff '75 Balt
John Hicks '74 NYG (#3)
John Hannah '73 NE (HOFer)
Royce Smith '72 NO

None in the last 15 years. An undervalued position in the salary cap era.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Not exactly the same thing. Look at Stevie Johnson - he's not an elite WR, but he's getting a little over 7m per year. He'd easily get more on the free agency market, as a similar tiered WR in Wallace just got about 10m per year. We locked him up early and now we're benefiting from it. I don't want to speak for DB, but I believe that's what he was talking about.

Johnson signed a whopping week before free agency, so clearly he wasn't confident in his market prospects. In a market where he was probably going to be the 4th or 5th WR option behind Jackson, Wayne, Colston, and possibly Garcon, I don't blame him.

[YardRat]

None in the last 15 years. An undervalued position in the salary cap era.

Kind of, but I wouldn't say undervalued as much as market-adjusted . Nobody was going to pay a G 8mil per year. That may revert a little bit now with the rookie cap. Wouldn't surprise me at all if guards start coming off the board between 5 and 10 again.

[Slim]

It looks like they are going to kick Hairston or Sanders inside.

[psubills62]

Johnson signed a whopping week before free agency, so clearly he wasn't confident in his market prospects. In a market where he was probably going to be the 4th or 5th WR option behind Jackson, Wayne, Colston, and possibly Garcon, I don't blame him.
Reggie Wayne? You mean the guy who signed for under 6m a year? Colston signed a very similar contract with NO as Stevie. Garcon got about 8.5m/year, so who is to say Stevie wouldn't have gotten 8? And yeah, if it was a different FA year (like this one), probably more.

The overall point is still the same. Whether it's the Bills doing it or others, locking players up earlier generally means you get them for less than what the free agent market would pay.

[better days]

Kind of, but I wouldn't say undervalued as much as market-adjusted . Nobody was going to pay a G 8mil per year. That may revert a little bit now with the rookie cap. Wouldn't surprise me at all if guards start coming off the board between 5 and 10 again.

IF you have a Guard that is talked about as a future HOF player, he might be drafted that high, but I doubt Guards in general are. The TOP 10 is for drafting QBs, DEs, OTs, CBs, LBs. And it is pretty much a guarantee any team picking in the top 10 can use a player at one of those positions, probably 3 or 4 of those positions.

[YardRat]

IF you have a Guard that is talked about as a future HOF player, he might be drafted that high, but I doubt Guards in general are. The TOP 10 is for drafting QBs, DEs, OTs, CBs, LBs. And it is pretty much a guarantee any team picking in the top 10 can use a player at one of those positions, probably 3 or 4 of those positions.

I won't disagree with that.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Reggie Wayne? You mean the guy who signed for under 6m a year?

Yes, the guy who even at 33 was a better free agent option than Johnson. Wayne took a hometown discount and Indy reaped the benefit.


The overall point is still the same. Whether it's the Bills doing it or others, locking players up earlier generally means you get them for less than what the free agent market would pay.

Well, yeah but you have to have a player that's willing to actually take that discount. I'm sure Pittsburgh would have loved to lock Wallace up for less than the eleventy billion dollars that Miami paid him, but he wouldn't take it. He thought he was worth more than that, and the market said he was. Joe Flacco played the same game, put forth a dominant postseason, and earned himself tens of millions of dollars in his contract year. "Lock them up early" is a great strategy, but you can't send Luca Brasi to make them sign that deal, and there's always the possibility that you lock them up too early - as we did with Fitz.

[psubills62]

Yes, the guy who even at 33 was a better free agent option than Johnson. Wayne took a hometown discount and Indy reaped the benefit.
So let me get this straight...Stevie Johnson signed with Buffalo because "clearly he wasn't confident in his market prospects", but Reggie Wayne did exactly the same thing (sign with former team near/into free agency) for less money, fewer years, and it's only because he gave Indy a hometown discount? Double standard. You're assigning motives and reasons as fact, when they're unfounded speculation at best. Wayne was not a better free agency option.


Well, yeah but you have to have a player that's willing to actually take that discount. I'm sure Pittsburgh would have loved to lock Wallace up for less than the eleventy billion dollars that Miami paid him, but he wouldn't take it. He thought he was worth more than that, and the market said he was. Joe Flacco played the same game, put forth a dominant postseason, and earned himself tens of millions of dollars in his contract year. "Lock them up early" is a great strategy, but you can't send Luca Brasi to make them sign that deal, and there's always the possibility that you lock them up too early - as we did with Fitz.
No one said it would always happen or was without risks. Of course you have to be smart about it and know the difference between Fitzpatrick and someone like Aaron Rodgers (now there's a lock-up-early discount). I don't believe the Steelers had cap room last year to sign Wallace, even if he gave them a discount. Pretty sure that's why they put the RFA tender on him, rather than franchise tag or signing him to a contract.

And yes, there are conditions to make this method successful (i.e. having talent, identifying the talent, identifying players who are willing to lock themselves in, etc.). However, it is very possible and is not that uncommon.

[DraftBoy]

So we've circled back around to you wanting elite left guard play without pay for elite left guard play. It's nice if you can get it, the Seahawks are benefitting from elite QB and DB play for 1/10th of its market value to name one example. But you can't have both for long.

Yes you can, its about controlling costs and understanding when its time to let a player walk away. It was clearly time to let Levitre walk away considering nobody should be spending that kind of money on an interior lineman. A year ago the narrative was completely different.


He was playing well in a contract year, so they extended him early. If Fitz' hadn't fallen off a cliff, it would have been great. But he did.

He was playing well, but he was never more than a decent to average starting QB who was never going to be the long term solution no matter how good he played in a 6 game spread. His history showed that, the Bills were foolish and it showed in their decision to extend him early. You don't extend a guy early because he hits a hot streak.

[BillsFever21]

Thinking like that is what keeps a team MEDIOCRE. The Bills had a GOOD LG In Levitre, a guy that NEVER missed a game.

I don't care how cheap Wormack is or how good he can play. I will bet that..............

A) He will not play his entire Rookie contract without missing a game

B) If he does play well, he will want far MORE money than Levitre when his Rookie contract is up.

And C, if you don't realize a #8 draft pick is worth more than a few Million Dollars you are just STUPID.

You have said Guard is a position easily filled by someone cheap, yet you would WASTE a TOP 10 pick on one STUPID STUPID STUPID STUPID.

That position is so easy to fill that we should obviously use the #8 pick on a GUARD of all things. Yeah that makes a ton of sense when we already had a good one and already have a ton of other holes to fill. They are not just minor holes but huge glaring holes like especially LB, QB and WR. Hell we need multiple bodies period at WR and LB let alone starting caliber players.

Most of these guys who thought it was a great move to let Levitire walk because it's EASY to find a good LG who has never missed a game is also fine with taking one in the first round. Great strategy there. If it was so easy then we wouldn't need to use the #8 pick on one. We better not draft one till at least the 3rd round at the VERY minimum with all the holes we have now.

Also why even take one at #8 with the current state of our team? Since they are so unimportant and not worth the money it doesn't make much sense to use the #8 pick on a player who we should just let walk in 4 years or so after his rookie contract is up. That is a high freaking pick to use on a guard when the top drafted ones usually don't go until the middle to end of the 1st round. They must have been drinking too much Kool-Aid from OBD.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

So let me get this straight...Stevie Johnson signed with Buffalo because "clearly he wasn't confident in his market prospects", but Reggie Wayne did exactly the same thing (sign with former team near/into free agency) for less money, fewer years, and it's only because he gave Indy a hometown discount? Double standard. You're assigning motives and reasons as fact, when they're unfounded speculation at best. Wayne was not a better free agency option.

Except for the part where he was. He was a 5 time pro bowler and 3 time all pro while Steve Johnson was an above-average starter. I like Johnson a lot, but Wayne was (and remains) a significantly better player.

Johnson took Buffalo's deal before FA because he was concerned about the market. Buffalo offered him because they were concerned about their ability to lure free agents. Both of those are legitimate concerns.


No one said it would always happen or was without risks. Of course you have to be smart about it and know the difference between Fitzpatrick and someone like Aaron Rodgers (now there's a lock-up-early discount). I don't believe the Steelers had cap room last year to sign Wallace, even if he gave them a discount. Pretty sure that's why they put the RFA tender on him, rather than franchise tag or signing him to a contract.

And yes, there are conditions to make this method successful (i.e. having talent, identifying the talent, identifying players who are willing to lock themselves in, etc.). However, it is very possible and is not that uncommon.

Of course it is "possible." Pittsburgh had two offseasons to clear the cap room to sign Wallace if they wanted. They played the long game, hoping they could convince him to take this market discount and he wouldn't do it. So he walked.


Yes you can, its about controlling costs and understanding when its time to let a player walk away. It was clearly time to let Levitre walk away considering nobody should be spending that kind of money on an interior lineman. A year ago the narrative was completely different.

This is continuing the assumption that Levitre would have accepted this discounted contract. If he would have, great. If not, then yes, we are letting a guy walk because we aren't willing to pay for elite play at that position. Frankly, if we aren't willing to dole out elite contracts at a position, we shouldn't be spending top picks at it either.


He was playing well, but he was never more than a decent to average starting QB who was never going to be the long term solution no matter how good he played in a 6 game spread. His history showed that, the Bills were foolish and it showed in their decision to extend him early. You don't extend a guy early because he hits a hot streak.

You are preaching to the choir. I didn't want to extend Fitz, it was a bad decision, but it does show the risk you take when you follow the strategy of extending players early.

[X-Era]

It looks like they are going to kick Hairston or Sanders inside.
Where have you heard that?

Personally, I'd like to see what Hairston can do at LG.

[X-Era]

Frankly, if we aren't willing to dole out elite contracts at a position, we shouldn't be spending top picks at it either. At G, we shouldn't and we don't.

Mario proves we will shell out top dollar. The reason we won't here is because he's a G.

If we had a franchise QB in place I'd be fine with paying top dollar for Levitre. But as long as this team is mediocre or worse we will have bigger needs and they need to be filled first.

We need to have the QB in place. We have other needs but this position is our top priority.

[X-Era]

The Bengals drafted and started Andy Dalton and went 9 and 7 and to the playoffs in his rookie year.

Nate Livings was their starting LG...
Kyle Cook was their starting C...

There are options on the team already and we could get a guy in the mid-rounds of this draft who may be able to start very early.

I'm a fan of Brian Winters from Kent State.

[stuckincincy]

The Bengals drafted and started Andy Dalton and went 9 and 7 and to the playoffs in his rookie year.

Nate Livings was their starting LG...
Kyle Cook was their starting C...

There are options on the team already and we could get a guy in the mid-rounds of this draft who may be able to start very early.




I'm a fan of Brian Winters from Kent State.


Not applicable to BUF (with only 6 selections), but I think Dysert is a viable project pick for a club with loaded with draft picks - perhaps as high as mid 3rd round.

[Historian]

Russ has got to go for there to be a winning football team in buffalo.

Year three: Wilson passes away and leaves 1/3 of the team to Brandon, as well as an employment contract for the life of the franchise.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

At G, we shouldn't and we don't.

The moves being suggested in this thread are to replace Levitre (top ~50 pick) with either Warmack at #8 or using the #8 on a LT to move Glenn (top 50 pick) inside to Levitres old spot. Yes, I think that high 2nd rounders are "top picks" and so we shouldn't be using them on guards if we don't value the position enough to pay for it.


Mario proves we will shell out top dollar. The reason we won't here is because he's a G.

Yes, I get that Nix and co don't value Guards that way, but I'm arguing that they should.


If we had a franchise QB in place I'd be fine with paying top dollar for Levitre. But as long as this team is mediocre or worse we will have bigger needs and they need to be filled first.

We need to have the QB in place. We have other needs but this position is our top priority.

One does not relate to the other. Yes, we need a QB, but unless you are talking about chasing a free agent QB then giving Levitre a contract doesn't affect that search one bit. I said weeks and weeks ago that I would be ok with letting Levitre walk if we were chasing Flacco, but we never got that chance. Other than him, who would you have us chase on the FA market?

If we're talking about drafting a QB, well then I would think keeping one of the best pass blockers in the league to protect him would be a priority, wouldn't you?

[psubills62]

Except for the part where he was. He was a 5 time pro bowler and 3 time all pro while Steve Johnson was an above-average starter. I like Johnson a lot, but Wayne was (and remains) a significantly better player.

Johnson took Buffalo's deal before FA because he was concerned about the market. Buffalo offered him because they were concerned about their ability to lure free agents. Both of those are legitimate concerns.
Bold part is complete speculation. Wayne may still be a better player (it's debatable), but he was not a better free agency option. You can keep saying it all you want, it's just not true. Wayne signed with the Colts the day free agency began for less money and fewer years than Stevie Johnson signed with Buffalo for. I could easily say he did that because he spent the day realizing nobody was calling him and the market for his services was nonexistent except in Indy, so he grabbed the contract while it was still available. But I'm not going to claim that because I don't know what went on.

It's very obvious you're doing nothing but speculating as to why each one signed to suit your point of view, and neither of your speculations have much basis in reality. Wayne signed for fewer years and less money with his previous team. He was not a better free agency option.


Of course it is "possible." Pittsburgh had two offseasons to clear the cap room to sign Wallace if they wanted. They played the long game, hoping they could convince him to take this market discount and he wouldn't do it. So he walked.
Having two offseasons to clear the room doesn't mean it's so easily done. They have had other players on big contracts and many of these contracts end up creating less cap room in the future for the sake of getting just barely enough now. They had to cut Harrison this year because they were already didn't have cap room. In fact, I've seen speculation that the Pats will try to sign Emmanuel Sanders to an offer sheet close to the RFA deadline with front-loaded contract because of the poor cap situation the Steelers are in.

The fact is that many good teams follow the "lock them up early" method. Just because one or two inevitably don't go along with it does not invalidate it. The key is knowing which ones to lock up and which ones can be let go depending on how much money they're seeking (and being able to replace those ones with draftees).

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Bold part is complete speculation.

I was mistaken on that point, Johnson signed on the last day to apply the franchise tag so it's quite possible he was threatened with it.


Wayne may still be a better player (it's debatable), but he was not a better free agency option. You can keep saying it all you want, it's just not true. Wayne signed with the Colts the day free agency began for less money and fewer years than Stevie Johnson signed with Buffalo for. I could easily say he did that because he spent the day realizing nobody was calling him and the market for his services was nonexistent except in Indy, so he grabbed the contract while it was still available. But I'm not going to claim that because I don't know what went on.

Except where it was reported by multiple sources that he was being chased hard by New England and signed for less money than they were offering. Ie, the hometown discount.
http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/03/16/colts-made-smart-move-to-re-sign-wayne
https://twitter.com/NFL_RealUpdates/statuses/256768819744366592
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/page/10spot-12week6/christian-ponder-ryan-tannehill-sam-bradford-lead-upstart-teams-adam-schefter-10-spot


Having two offseasons to clear the room doesn't mean it's so easily done. They have had other players on big contracts and many of these contracts end up creating less cap room in the future for the sake of getting just barely enough now.

I didn't say it ibe easy, if it was easy they would have done it. They've been negotiating with the guy for nearly two years at this point, they knew he wouldn't come down and decided it wasn't worth cutting to the quick to keep him.


They had to cut Harrison this year because they were already didn't have cap room.

Harrison may have been cut anyway. His production fell off last year and he's the NFL's poster child for the new headhunting rules. If he puts a toe out of line this year, he's in line to be suspended. And the Steelers have never been sentimental about keeping aging linebackers - see also: Joey Porter.


In fact, I've seen speculation that the Pats will try to sign Emmanuel Sanders to an offer sheet close to the RFA deadline with front-loaded contract because of the poor cap situation the Steelers are in.

It would be a sound move.

But why are you holding up the Steelers as examples of bad cap management? They are letting talent walk because they have too much of it. When your team is littered with Pro Bowlers packing Super Bowl rings, yes, some of them will eventually have to walk. They are letting guys like Harrison and Wallace go because they need to keep guys like Woodley, Roethlisberger, and Pouncey.

By contrast, the Bills are talent-starved and have a healthy cap situation, and are letting excellent players like Levitre walk because they just don't think guards are valuable.


The fact is that many good teams follow the "lock them up early" method. Just because one or two inevitably don't go along with it does not invalidate it. The key is knowing which ones to lock up and which ones can be let go depending on how much money they're seeking (and being able to replace those ones with draftees).

I never said it invalidated it, I said only works when you can convince players to accept less than their market value. Players and agents don't exist in a vacuum, they have ideas about what they are worth based on what other players are getting. Several other teams highly value guards. Players like Levitre and Glenn know this. If they play at a high level for Buffalo, they know they can get big money from another team that is actually willing to pay for them.

What's more, as has been discussed ad nauseum, Buffalo doesn't have anything to pitch a player on except money. Denver can sell guys on taking a deal to play with Manning, same as New England with Brady. Miami can sell the South Florida nightlife. Dallas can sell the biggest crowds in the league, multiple primetime games every year, and being close to home for Texas guys. New York can sell bigtime advertising dollars. Buffalo has nothing.

[psubills62]

I was mistaken on that point, Johnson signed on the last day to apply the franchise tag so it's quite possible he was threatened with it.

Except where it was reported by multiple sources that he was being chased hard by New England and signed for less money than they were offering. Ie, the hometown discount.
http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/03/16/colts-made-smart-move-to-re-sign-wayne
https://twitter.com/NFL_RealUpdates/statuses/256768819744366592
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/page/10spot-12week6/christian-ponder-ryan-tannehill-sam-bradford-lead-upstart-teams-adam-schefter-10-spot

Sounds like you were right about the hometown discount, but considering he took significantly less than Johnson did, it's still impossible to say which one would have gotten the better deal on the free market. I'd still be shocked if Johnson wasn't considered more highly than Wayne in the free agent market.

And you're still speculating on the reasons Johnson signed. I don't recall any player signing simply because he was threatened with the franchise tag.

I think it's pretty obvious Johnson signed for less than what his overall market value would have been. Whether you think there was a saturated market or not, whether or not Wayne was supposedly better, Johnson still signed for less than his tier of receivers is getting on the open market. That's the point.


Harrison may have been cut anyway. His production fell off last year and he's the NFL's poster child for the new headhunting rules. If he puts a toe out of line this year, he's in line to be suspended. And the Steelers have never been sentimental about keeping aging linebackers - see also: Joey Porter.
Well, I guess we'll never know. Right now the issue appears to be cap space.


It would be a sound move.

But why are you holding up the Steelers as examples of bad cap management? They are letting talent walk because they have too much of it. When your team is littered with Pro Bowlers packing Super Bowl rings, yes, some of them will eventually have to walk. They are letting guys like Harrison and Wallace go because they need to keep guys like Woodley, Roethlisberger, and Pouncey.

By contrast, the Bills are talent-starved and have a healthy cap situation, and are letting excellent players like Levitre walk because they just don't think guards are valuable.
Because you need to pick and choose who you want to pay. Buffalo hasn't exactly excelled at this, but signing Levitre now would almost certainly mean letting someone else (maybe Spiller) walk down the road. Our cap situation is decent, but hardly great and one big contract now could wipe out a lot of space down the road. There's a lot of bloated contracts on the roster.


I never said it invalidated it, I said only works when you can convince players to accept less than their market value. Players and agents don't exist in a vacuum, they have ideas about what they are worth based on what other players are getting. Several other teams highly value guards. Players like Levitre and Glenn know this. If they play at a high level for Buffalo, they know they can get big money from another team that is actually willing to pay for them.
Hm, you mean like with...Stevie Johnson?

As DB said, if you're willing to make commitments to players early, they like having the long-term security. That's why so many players hate the franchise tag - earns them a lot of money, but not much long-term stability. And no, it doesn't always work, but it works often enough that most teams use it to build their teams.


What's more, as has been discussed ad nauseum, Buffalo doesn't have anything to pitch a player on except money. Denver can sell guys on taking a deal to play with Manning, same as New England with Brady. Miami can sell the South Florida nightlife. Dallas can sell the biggest crowds in the league, multiple primetime games every year, and being close to home for Texas guys. New York can sell bigtime advertising dollars. Buffalo has nothing.
"Biggest crowds in the league"? Who on earth goes to Dallas because of that? Crowds are for high school recruits, not pro free agents.


I'm not sure what the issue is here. It's very obvious that every successful team in the league signs some players and lets some walk. Just because Buffalo is in worse shape talent-wise than others does not mean they should simply desperately sign everyone they can for tons of money. It's about managing money for now and for the future. Levitre's money now takes away money from someone else in the future. Do we have players worth signing in the future? A few, hopefully more will come. The key is and always will come down to drafting well, and then locking up true core guys when they're able. If Levitre isn't seen as a true core player, especially by a new coaching staff, so be it. Maybe they're wrong, maybe they're right. But you don't change your plans just because you're desperate - that's how guys like Fitzpatrick get signed to big contracts that take up a decent amount of dead cap space.

I think we agree on most aspects, actually. I guess I just don't think you stray from the model of building a team just because of potential desperation.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Sounds like you were right about the hometown discount, but considering he took significantly less than Johnson did, it's still impossible to say which one would have gotten the better deal on the free market. I'd still be shocked if Johnson wasn't considered more highly than Wayne in the free agent market.

You're thinking of 2013 Johnson. 2012 Johnson was a guy who put together two solid but unspectacular seasons marred with crucial drops at several key points and a benching from his head coach over the repeated dancing fouls. Wayne was older but was more mature by a mile.


I think it's pretty obvious Johnson signed for less than what his overall market value would have been. Whether you think there was a saturated market or not, whether or not Wayne was supposedly better, Johnson still signed for less than his tier of receivers is getting on the open market. That's the point.


I strongly disagree. You're putting Johnson in a tier with guys like Wallace and Vincent Jackson? No, he's not one of the top guys now and he certainly wasn't a year ago.


Because you need to pick and choose who you want to pay. Buffalo hasn't exactly excelled at this, but signing Levitre now would almost certainly mean letting someone else (maybe Spiller) walk down the road. Our cap situation is decent, but hardly great and one big contract now could wipe out a lot of space down the road. There's a lot of bloated contracts on the roster.

Nobody cares about big contracts when the player is actually performing. Is anyone in Denver moaning about Manning's $96 million dollar deal? He's taking up 1/6th of their cap by himself, after all. Of course no one is, because he's been playing great ball.

Contracts to guys like Levitre don't kill a team. He shows up every game and plays hard every down, and he's damn good at his job. It's the endless grind of giving "below market" contracts to useless bums like Kelsay and Brad Smith that does it. Throwing $20 million at Mark Anderson does it - a guy who's been nothing but a pass rush specialist his entire career, and then forcing him to be a 3 down defensive end because we've got to justify his contract. Throwing $17 million at Leodis McKelvin because people still think punt returners matter on a defense that can't force punts, and banking on his "potential" to be an outside corner when two separate coaching staffs have benched him in 5 seasons.

Why do we keep spending money on those guys? Because they play the sexy positions and Levitre doesn't.


"Biggest crowds in the league"? Who on earth goes to Dallas because of that? Crowds are for high school recruits, not pro free agents.

People with giant egos, like many pro athletes. Given equal money, would you rather play in front of 90,000 people in a state of the art stadium in primetime, or play in front of 55,000 people in an nfl backwater like St. Louis?


I'm not sure what the issue is here. It's very obvious that every successful team in the league signs some players and lets some walk. Just because Buffalo is in worse shape talent-wise than others does not mean they should simply desperately sign everyone they can for tons of money. It's about managing money for now and for the future. Levitre's money now takes away money from someone else in the future. Do we have players worth signing in the future? A few, hopefully more will come. The key is and always will come down to drafting well, and then locking up true core guys when they're able. If Levitre isn't seen as a true core player, especially by a new coaching staff, so be it. Maybe they're wrong, maybe they're right. But you don't change your plans just because you're desperate - that's how guys like Fitzpatrick get signed to big contracts that take up a decent amount of dead cap space.

I think we agree on most aspects, actually. I guess I just don't think you stray from the model of building a team just because of potential desperation.

Who said anything about signing "everyone"? I'm talking about signing your actual talent. Look over our last 10 drafts, find even 10 guys that Buffalo has developed in to top-tier or even middle-tier starters. We are a team that has historically been atrocious at drafting, so we absolutely cannot afford to be letting one of the few actual elite players we've developed walk just because Nix has an outdated idea of what positions are "valuable."

[X-Era]

Not applicable to BUF (with only 6 selections), but I think Dysert is a viable project pick for a club with loaded with draft picks - perhaps as high as mid 3rd round.
What's not a viable option in Buffalo?

Drafting a rookie and starting that player? I think that's likely.
Drafting a replacement G who may be able to start very early? I think that's very possible as well.

[X-Era]

The moves being suggested in this thread are to replace Levitre (top ~50 pick) with either Warmack at #8 or using the #8 on a LT to move Glenn (top 50 pick) inside to Levitres old spot. Yes, I think that high 2nd rounders are "top picks" and so we shouldn't be using them on guards if we don't value the position enough to pay for it. I don't think we draft a G until the 3rd round at the earliest. Personally, I'd wait until the 4th for a guy like Brian Winters.


Yes, I get that Nix and co don't value Guards that way, but I'm arguing that they should. I agree with paying attention to the position but I can't argue we should have huge money tied up in that position when we still lack a QB among many other things.


One does not relate to the other. Yes, we need a QB, but unless you are talking about chasing a free agent QB then giving Levitre a contract doesn't affect that search one bit. I said weeks and weeks ago that I would be ok with letting Levitre walk if we were chasing Flacco, but we never got that chance. Other than him, who would you have us chase on the FA market? My argument against spending top coin on Levitre was two fold. First, we have several other pressing needs and some spots should be addressed through FA. LB, TE, and even a cheaper G are areas that I'd like to see addressed. I'd rather sign Fred Davis at 4 mill per and a UFA G at 4 mill per than spend 8 mill per on Levitre. Two, at some point the contract catches up with us. If we do draft a franchise QB, we will need to pay that player and QB's are not cheap when they get signed long term. You can only have just so many players with top 10 contracts. No, personally I don't want G to be one of them.


If we're talking about drafting a QB, well then I would think keeping one of the best pass blockers in the league to protect him would be a priority, wouldn't you?Not really. I feel LT, C, and even RT are more important OL positions than LG. My Dalton reference seems to make the point that you don't need an all-pro line to have success at QB. Hell, guys like Urbik and Pears out to show you can get OLmen on the cheap and have success.

[better days]

What's not a viable option in Buffalo?

Drafting a rookie and starting that player? I think that's likely.
Drafting a replacement G who may be able to start very early? I think that's very possible as well.

Well, Dysert is NOT a viable project for any team until the 4th rnd or later. Looks more like a 6th or 7th rnd pick to me.

And a Guard at #8 is not going to happen.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

I don't think we draft a G until the 3rd round at the earliest. Personally, I'd wait until the 4th for a guy like Brian Winters.

I don't like that plan, but at least it is logically consistent with not valuing the guard position.


My argument against spending top coin on Levitre was two fold. First, we have several other pressing needs and some spots should be addressed through FA. LB, TE, and even a cheaper G are areas that I'd like to see addressed. I'd rather sign Fred Davis at 4 mill per and a UFA G at 4 mill per than spend 8 mill per on Levitre.

And why wouldn't you want a guy who's been benched by the coach that drafted him, suspended for failing drug tests, and ended the year on IR with an injury that's notoriously tricky to rehab from? This is what I'm talking about. People are unwilling to spend 8 million on Levitre, who's never missed a game and played excellent ball, to spend the money guys like McKelvin and Davis who are massive gambles but play the sexy positions.

As for the latter, what guard is worth that money that's left in FA? The only guy who's justified that kind of deal is Moore, and he's already 33 years old.


Two, at some point the contract catches up with us. If we do draft a franchise QB, we will need to pay that player and QB's are not cheap when they get signed long term. You can only have just so many players with top 10 contracts. No, personally I don't want G to be one of them.

Did you think I wanted to pay Levitre Top 10 money into perpetuity? Of course not. If we drafted a QB this year, he would be under a rookie cap deal which would be extremely reasonable and is already accounted for in the budget. The absolute earliest we are even allowed to renegotiate his deal is after his third season, and the only reason that would happen is if we had a Russell Wilson situation where he has totally outperformed his rookie deal to the point that it's almost insulting to keep it. I think we can both agree that is a problem we'd kill to have.

So if there was a salary cap reckoning because of the QB, it wouldn't be for at least three seasons, and only then if said QB was ripping the league in half. Guess how many Bills are under contract through four or more seasons? Six - Johnson, the Williams twins, McKelvin, Urbik, and Manny Lawson, with hypothetical Levitre making seven. We could completely re-make our roster before Levitre's contract would become an issue -and remember in your scenario it only becomes an issue because our rookie QB is an immediate All-pro player. When Levitre's deal expired then we could approach the issue again, after all at that point he be 30+ and we'd have several more years of tape on him to decide if he's still a top 10 guard.


Not really. I feel LT, C, and even RT are more important OL positions than LG. My Dalton reference seems to make the point that you don't need an all-pro line to have success at QB. Hell, guys like Urbik and Pears out to show you can get OLmen on the cheap and have success.

Dalton was sacked 46 times this year, 3rd most in the NFL, including twice in his playoff loss. Is that the example you want to use? I'd argue he'd be even better if he wasn't getting thrown to the ground 3 times a game.

You can always find examples of athletes who succeed despite weaknesses in their teammates. But that doesn't mean you should ignore said teammates. Besides, who on this roster do we have that is so superlative that they don't need help? Arguably only Spiller, and he's got 1 elite season under his belt, which perhaps coincidentally happened once we had a coherent offensive line with 3 of the starters staying put most of the year.

[psubills62]

[/B]
You're thinking of 2013 Johnson. 2012 Johnson was a guy who put together two solid but unspectacular seasons marred with crucial drops at several key points and a benching from his head coach over the repeated dancing fouls. Wayne was older but was more mature by a mile.
Maturity (age) is one of the main reasons Wayne was not a better FA option.


I strongly disagree. You're putting Johnson in a tier with guys like Wallace and Vincent Jackson? No, he's not one of the top guys now and he certainly wasn't a year ago.
Then we disagree. Depends on what you mean by "top guy." Top option in FA, yes. Top WR in the league, no. Remember that tier includes guys like Pierre Garcon who has had many more drops than Johnson.


Nobody cares about big contracts when the player is actually performing. Is anyone in Denver moaning about Manning's $96 million dollar deal? He's taking up 1/6th of their cap by himself, after all. Of course no one is, because he's been playing great ball.

Contracts to guys like Levitre don't kill a team. He shows up every game and plays hard every down, and he's damn good at his job. It's the endless grind of giving "below market" contracts to useless bums like Kelsay and Brad Smith that does it. Throwing $20 million at Mark Anderson does it - a guy who's been nothing but a pass rush specialist his entire career, and then forcing him to be a 3 down defensive end because we've got to justify his contract. Throwing $17 million at Leodis McKelvin because people still think punt returners matter on a defense that can't force punts, and banking on his "potential" to be an outside corner when two separate coaching staffs have benched him in 5 seasons.

Why do we keep spending money on those guys? Because they play the sexy positions and Levitre doesn't.
Never said it killed a team. What I said is that it takes away money from someone else. Comparing a historically great QB to a decent OG makes me laugh.

Could also be that Levitre plays a position that is more replaceable than the others, too. You seriously think Buffalo signed Anderson and re-signed McKelvin because they play "sexy" positions? Just...no.



People with giant egos, like many pro athletes. Given equal money, would you rather play in front of 90,000 people in a state of the art stadium in primetime, or play in front of 55,000 people in an nfl backwater like St. Louis?
I'd love to see one quote from a free agent saying he went because of the big stadium. Those are minimal reasons at best for players. The main reasons players sign are 1) money, and 2) commitment. There are other reasons here and there, but those are the consistent ones. The second one is especially big when re-signing.



Who said anything about signing "everyone"? I'm talking about signing your actual talent. Look over our last 10 drafts, find even 10 guys that Buffalo has developed in to top-tier or even middle-tier starters. We are a team that has historically been atrocious at drafting, so we absolutely cannot afford to be letting one of the few actual elite players we've developed walk just because Nix has an outdated idea of what positions are "valuable."
I already answered this in the exact part you quoted. If you're not going to read it, I'm not going to repeat it. I will add, though: if Levitre isn't seen as a core player, you don't pay that much for him, period. Whether that's because of his position, because of his fit in Marrone's scheme, etc., I don't care. Whether or not they're making a poor decision on if he's truly a core player or not is another matter.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Maturity (age) is one of the main reasons Wayne was not a better FA option.

It's the only reason you could even argue he was not a better FA option. But that's neither here nor there, let's just agree that you are much higher on Johnson than I was a year ago and leave it at that.


Never said it killed a team. What I said is that it takes away money from someone else. Comparing a historically great QB to a decent OG makes me laugh.

You missed the point. Nobody complains about Manning's huge contract because he earns it. When Von Miller gets his millions in a few years I doubt you'll hear anyone complaining about that either. Big contracts aren't the problem. Big contracts to bums are the problem. And Levitre was more than a "decent" guard, he's an excellent guard in his physical prime.


Could also be that Levitre plays a position that is more replaceable than the others, too. You seriously think Buffalo signed Anderson and re-signed McKelvin because they play "sexy" positions? Just...no.

Yes, I do. You can tell what units a GM values by where he spends his free agent money and uses his first 3 rounds worth of picks. Those are the guys that he expects to be the backbone of this team. From that, it's obvious Nix highly values halfbacks and defensive backs, and his overwhelming priority is DLine. By contrast, our OLine was and remains one of the cheapest units on the team and in the league. It's obvious that he doesn't consider that a priority for his team building, an idea I cannot disagree with more.


I'd love to see one quote from a free agent saying he went because of the big stadium. Those are minimal reasons at best for players. The main reasons players sign are 1) money, and 2) commitment. There are other reasons here and there, but those are the consistent ones. The second one is especially big when re-signing.

I specifically said "given equal money" which is the point I was trying to make. So, with similar offers on the table, the decision then comes to secondary factors. Would you rather play in Dallas, in a marquee NFL market in a city with pleasant fall and winter weather, or come to Buffalo to play for a perennial loser in a frigid city? And that's without even touching the tax implications of making the majority of your money in New York state rather than Texas or Florida, which can be significant for top free agents.

Buffalo has nothing, absolutely nothing, to offer free agents except money and then more money. And now we don't even want to offer that.


I already answered this in the exact part you quoted. If you're not going to read it, I'm not going to repeat it. I will add, though: if Levitre isn't seen as a core player, you don't pay that much for him, period. Whether that's because of his position, because of his fit in Marrone's scheme, etc., I don't care. Whether or not they're making a poor decision on if he's truly a core player or not is another matter.

Yes, I get that Nix doesn't think he's a core player. I'm saying he should.

Look, I would absolutely love it if we found a guard in the 6th round from Directional State U who just utterly falls in love with Buffalo and is willing to play dominant football for 80 cents on the dollar. I just don't think that's a realistic expectation.

[X-Era]

And why wouldn't you want a guy who's been benched by the coach that drafted him, suspended for failing drug tests, and ended the year on IR with an injury that's notoriously tricky to rehab from? This is what I'm talking about. People are unwilling to spend 8 million on Levitre, who's never missed a game and played excellent ball, to spend the money guys like McKelvin and Davis who are massive gambles but play the sexy positions.

As for the latter, what guard is worth that money that's left in FA? The only guy who's justified that kind of deal is Moore, and he's already 33 years old.

My point was less around whom we get for 4 mill per and more around the concept that we could get two starters for the same price.

A better point is that Levitre may have signed a deal with a low cap hit this year which would have not hurt us much at all.

And truth be known, at this point I don't care if our QB gets sacked 200 times a year if it means going to the playoffs. The reverse is also true. Does it really help anything to have the leagues best LG but finish under .500% ever year because we have little else?

We muist prioritize the needs and get the guys we need at the key positions first. QB is at the top of that list and LG is down quite a bit.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

My point was less around whom we get for 4 mill per and more around the concept that we could get two starters for the same price.

Being a "starter" is totally irrelevant if you're only starting because everyone behind you sucks worse. Right now, our "starting" QB is Tarvaris Jackson at $2.25 million, well below market value for a "starting" QB. But nobody thinks that is a good situation.


A better point is that Levitre may have signed a deal with a low cap hit this year which would have not hurt us much at all.

That would have been fantastic, but I don't know if that deal was ever offered.


And truth be known, at this point I don't care if our QB gets sacked 200 times a year if it means going to the playoffs.

I think your QB getting sacked 200 times might affect your chances of making the playoffs and continuing to get there. I mean, Green Bay made the playoffs in a year that Favre led the league in INTs, but I'm sure the would have much rather he didn't.


The reverse is also true. Does it really help anything to have the leagues best LG but finish under .500% ever year because we have little else?

People are grossly overstating how much Levitre would cost to keep. We don't have to dump Spiller and Gilmore to keep him, we have to dump overpaid bums like McKelvin, Fitz, Brad Smith, Kelsay, etc. All that middling roster detritus that hoovers up the money and never accomplishes anything.

[jdaltroy5]

My point was less around whom we get for 4 mill per and more around the concept that we could get two starters for the same price.

A better point is that Levitre may have signed a deal with a low cap hit this year which would have not hurt us much at all.

And truth be known, at this point I don't care if our QB gets sacked 200 times a year if it means going to the playoffs. The reverse is also true. Does it really help anything to have the leagues best LG but finish under .500% ever year because we have little else?

We muist prioritize the needs and get the guys we need at the key positions first. QB is at the top of that list and LG is down quite a bit.

So you'd rather have two guys with question marks than one guy that you know is very good?

You don't win with a team full of average players.

Despite what people think, OG isn't some position that can be easily replaced. When we actually spent a high pick on OG, we actually got some results out of it and that, combined with other high picks on the OL turned our OL into a pretty good unit.

Of course we need to prioritize our needs, but I'm hoping Nix knows how to multi-task. He can sign other players to help a QB rather than just focusing on getting said QB.

In regards to the money, unless we go out and sign some expensive FA at QB (not going to happen) then we won't be paying that much for at least 2-3 years anyway. Like Illum said, if we DO get a QB that requires a big raise, then we're laughing anyway.

[psubills62]

It's the only reason you could even argue he was not a better FA option. But that's neither here nor there, let's just agree that you are much higher on Johnson than I was a year ago and leave it at that.
Sure.


You missed the point. Nobody complains about Manning's huge contract because he earns it. When Von Miller gets his millions in a few years I doubt you'll hear anyone complaining about that either. Big contracts aren't the problem. Big contracts to bums are the problem. And Levitre was more than a "decent" guard, he's an excellent guard in his physical prime.
He's decent. I was never that high on him, personally. Big contracts are indeed a problem if the players you're paying aren't core players. If you're paying someone just because they're talented and you feel you need talent, that's going to get you into trouble quickly (cough, Langston Walker, cough Derrick Dockery). It's a legitimate question to ask if Levitre would ever be truly worth 8m per year.


Yes, I do. You can tell what units a GM values by where he spends his free agent money and uses his first 3 rounds worth of picks. Those are the guys that he expects to be the backbone of this team. From that, it's obvious Nix highly values halfbacks and defensive backs, and his overwhelming priority is DLine. By contrast, our OLine was and remains one of the cheapest units on the team and in the league. It's obvious that he doesn't consider that a priority for his team building, an idea I cannot disagree with more.
Saying a GM values certain positions is a lot different than brushing it off as giving money to "sexy positions." BTW, that's the first ever time I've heard DE be described as a sexy position. That's usually WR.

Pretty sure Nix has drafted 5 OL and gotten Pears and Urbik since he's been here. I believe Rinehart was a pickup as well. That's a decent number of OL. Guess it depends on your definition of priority. Are you particularly unhappy with how the OL played the last couple of years? Because all but two players on OL were brought in by Nix, and I would think most people would be happy about having a decent OL without paying tons of money. But apparently I'm wrong.


I specifically said "given equal money" which is the point I was trying to make. So, with similar offers on the table, the decision then comes to secondary factors. Would you rather play in Dallas, in a marquee NFL market in a city with pleasant fall and winter weather, or come to Buffalo to play for a perennial loser in a frigid city? And that's without even touching the tax implications of making the majority of your money in New York state rather than Texas or Florida, which can be significant for top free agents.

Buffalo has nothing, absolutely nothing, to offer free agents except money and then more money. And now we don't even want to offer that.
I'm wondering where the drama queen emoticon is. Still going to be waiting on that quote.

I feel like this conversation has gotten off track. The point is that signing guys early often nets relative discounts and is done quite often. If Buffalo offers a player a commitment and money ~1 year before his contract is up, many times that player will re-sign. Maybe we'll encounter one or two players who are wooed by weather and "big stadiums" (yeah, right), but re-signing early is generally the best plan to follow.


Yes, I get that Nix doesn't think he's a core player. I'm saying he should.

Look, I would absolutely love it if we found a guard in the 6th round from Directional State U who just utterly falls in love with Buffalo and is willing to play dominant football for 80 cents on the dollar. I just don't think that's a realistic expectation.
Whether or not he's a core player is a different argument than if locking players up early can work. What you don't seem to understand is that every team in the league uses this method. They try to lock players up early at a slightly discounted rate, which is in exchange for the commitment from the team. Whether or not you think it's a realistic expectation is irrelevant - it happens quite a bit. And if someone leaves, then you replace them through the draft or maybe through FA.

[OpIv37]

How did a thread with the words "team" and "plan" go six pages?

The first response should have been "this team hasn't had a plan since 1997" and you could have saved yourselves lots of time.

[stuckincincy]

What's not a viable option in Buffalo?

Drafting a rookie and starting that player? I think that's likely.
Drafting a replacement G who may be able to start very early? I think that's very possible as well.

Heh - everything is, I suppose. :candle:

[IlluminatusUIUC]

He's decent. I was never that high on him, personally.

There are two discussions going on here. Some people think that no guard is ever with 8 million, full stop. That's a question of scheme and positional value. Some people are saying that a guard might be worth 8 million, but Levitre isn't one of them. That's a question of Levitre's individual skill. I personally disagree with both of those.


Big contracts are indeed a problem if the players you're paying aren't core players. If you're paying someone just because they're talented and you feel you need talent, that's going to get you into trouble quickly (cough, Langston Walker, cough Derrick Dockery). It's a legitimate question to ask if Levitre would ever be truly worth 8m per year.

Docker and Walker were bad signings because they sucked out loud. Walker could have been salvaged if they put him at RT, where he belonged, but they decided he had to be an LT because POSITIONAL VALUE and when he couldn't play that we cut him.


Saying a GM values certain positions is a lot different than brushing it off as giving money to "sexy positions." BTW, that's the first ever time I've heard DE be described as a sexy position. That's usually WR.

Of course they are, people love a bigtime pass rusher. Mark Anderson is a massive liability against the run and realistically a 3rd down option only, and he got $20 million from the Bills because he had 10 sacks the year before.


Pretty sure Nix has drafted 5 OL and gotten Pears and Urbik since he's been here. I believe Rinehart was a pickup as well. That's a decent number of OL. Guess it depends on your definition of priority.

I gave my definition of priority. Nix has used one high pick on an OL, the rest have been UDFAs, late rounders, and players poached from practice squads. Compare that with how he built the defensive line: High 2nd and 3rd rounders in his first year, the #3 pick and a large contract to Kyle Williams in year two, and $120 million in DEs in year three. Which one do you think he values?


Are you particularly unhappy with how the OL played the last couple of years? Because all but two players on OL were brought in by Nix, and I would think most people would be happy about having a decent OL without paying tons of money. But apparently I'm wrong.

Are you dense? Of course I like how the OL played. That's why I want to keep the unit together. We finally, after years of wandering in the desert, have an OLine that opens holes for our backs and keeps our QBs upright and now we let the best player go and his backup.


I'm wondering where the drama queen emoticon is. Still going to be waiting on that quote.

Fine.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/nfl/2009/10/post_7.html

McQuistan and the others from Oregon said that from the media scrutiny and a rabid fan base to the team's new $1.3 billion stadium, playing for the Cowboys is unlike anything they've ever experienced.
...
One indisputable aspect of the Cowboys is the team's nationwide popularity.
Rookie linebacker Victor Butler, a fourth-round pick out of Oregon State, said he was taken aback by seeing thousands of fans at training camp practices held in San Antonio.
And road games are no different.
"It's crazy," Butler said. "You go to the hotel and there's 300 Dallas Cowboys fans -- in Tampa Bay!"


Siavii said it seemed as if there were more Dallas fans than Kansas City fans during their game Oct. 11.


Said McQuistan, whose twin brother, Paul McQuistan, plays offensive line for Oakland: "There's always a lot of people there cheering and wanting autographs. It's really a great feeling. When other veterans come in there, they say it's not like that with every club."


Still, Olshansky said, the attention can get overwhelming.


"In training camp it's pretty hard," he said, "when every day at practice there's 10,000 fans and all screaming your name and wanting to get your attention to get autographs, and you're tired."

...
No team has as many fans currently cheering for them in person on game day than Dallas, which opened an 111,000-capacity domed stadium that is the largest of its kind in the world.

"It's awesome," McQuistan said. "The first time I saw it was during a concert, and it's amazing. I was thinking, 'You got to be kidding me. We get to play football here.'"

Cowboys Stadium includes amenities out of the norm. The centerpiece is the largest high definition video screen in the world, which hangs above the field and measures 11,520 square feet (160 feet across and 72 feet high).

"Sometimes the reason we all look up there is because you can see the game better than watching from the sideline," Butler said

...
"It's definitely an experience like no other stadium," Olshansky said.

Each player said the circuslike atmosphere is not a distraction.
"For me, it's still football," Olshansky said. "I don't let anything get to me. But it's fun."
In many ways, the stadium could be viewed as a fitting jewel in the Cowboys' kingdom of excess.
"It's kind of like you dress good, you play good," Siavii said. "It's kind of like the stadium is so amazing you want to pay amazing in it. That's how I feel like when I'm out there. I want to put on a show."


So answer the question. Given an identical contract, would you sign with Dallas or Buffalo? How many 26 year olds would agree with you?


I feel like this conversation has gotten off track. The point is that signing guys early often nets relative discounts and is done quite often. If Buffalo offers a player a commitment and money ~1 year before his contract is up, many times that player will re-sign. Maybe we'll encounter one or two players who are wooed by weather and "big stadiums" (yeah, right), but re-signing early is generally the best plan to follow.

Whether or not he's a core player is a different argument than if locking players up early can work. What you don't seem to understand is that every team in the league uses this method. They try to lock players up early at a slightly discounted rate, which is in exchange for the commitment from the team. Whether or not you think it's a realistic expectation is irrelevant - it happens quite a bit. And if someone leaves, then you replace them through the draft or maybe through FA.

You're acting like I'm opposed to signing players for less money. I would have loved to sign Levitre for less than market value. The difference is that I am also willing to sign him for market value rather than just letting him walk. If we had made some move to aggressively improve another area of the team then I could maybe understand the move. But we instead spent the money signing guys like McKelvin and Manny Lawson.

[X-Era]

So you'd rather have two guys with question marks than one guy that you know is very good?

You don't win with a team full of average players.

Despite what people think, OG isn't some position that can be easily replaced. When we actually spent a high pick on OG, we actually got some results out of it and that, combined with other high picks on the OL turned our OL into a pretty good unit.

Of course we need to prioritize our needs, but I'm hoping Nix knows how to multi-task. He can sign other players to help a QB rather than just focusing on getting said QB.

In regards to the money, unless we go out and sign some expensive FA at QB (not going to happen) then we won't be paying that much for at least 2-3 years anyway. Like Illum said, if we DO get a QB that requires a big raise, then we're laughing anyway.
You build through the draft. But should always be on the lookout for guys that can fill holes now with decent contracts and can at the minimum be solid backups if/when your young guy develops.

Unfortunately, we can't fill all the holes this year. The cap is basically flat so you have to look at the best balance of players vs. the cap. And this team, with no starting QB, no starting quality LB's, no starting quality SS, 2 holes at WR including a true #1/#2 type cannot afford to sink 8 mill per in a LG. Especially when they got solid play out of other teams cast-offs like Pears and Urbik. That right there shows that the premise that you cannot get solid OL play from anything other than a 1st or even 2nd round OG is false.

The high draft pick investment is usually on LT's, RT's, C's, and then G's in that order.

Nothing is as linear as it's made out to be here and strategy is the name of the game. If we can find a day one starting LG who has potential to be at Levitre's caliber in a few years and sign a mid-tier vet to fill in as a starting LG for now but be a solid backup when the youngsters ready, we invest may 3 mill per instead of 8. And since were likely starting a rookie QB anyways, why pay 8 mill next year for top notch LG play when it will be wasted anyways? Then in 2014 when it may actually matter you have a youngster ready to be a solid starter while still on his rookie deal.

With all our holes, the fact that much less expensive G's can start without sacrificing too much, and the fact that this next year is all new coaches, schemes, playbooks to learn, and probably a rookie QB, it all adds up to Levitre leaving.

Personally, I would have liked to have had him back but it makes plenty of sense.

Please show me the rookie or even 2nd year QB's that went to the playoffs with 8 mill dollar LG's. Maybe they are out there but the Dalton example certainly wasn't.

[X-Era]

There are two discussions going on here. Some people think that no guard is ever with 8 million, full stop. That's a question of scheme and positional value. Some people are saying that a guard might be worth 8 million, but Levitre isn't one of them. That's a question of Levitre's individual skill. I personally disagree with both of those.Just for the record, I have said neither.

1) He is worth 8 million if that's what the going rate is for a top 10 or 5 G. I think he is a top 10 or 5 G.
2) Top 10 or 5 G's are worth 8 mill.

What I'm saying is this team should not spend 8 mill on any G at this time.

If it was on a rookie QB deal, we were a playoff team already, we had some great value contracts with players loyal to Buffalo that are still playing at a very high level, probably several other scenarios... I could see it.

But I can see the logic that we should have let him walk... Not us, not now.

[better days]

You build through the draft. But should always be on the lookout for guys that can fill holes now with decent contracts and can at the minimum be solid backups if/when your young guy develops.

Unfortunately, we can't fill all the holes this year. The cap is basically flat so you have to look at the best balance of players vs. the cap. And this team, with no starting QB, no starting quality LB's, no starting quality SS, 2 holes at WR including a true #1/#2 type cannot afford to sink 8 mill per in a LG. Especially when they got solid play out of other teams cast-offs like Pears and Urbik. That right there shows that the premise that you cannot get solid OL play from anything other than a 1st or even 2nd round OG is false.

The high draft pick investment is usually on LT's, RT's, C's, and then G's in that order.

Nothing is as linear as it's made out to be here and strategy is the name of the game. If we can find a day one starting LG who has potential to be at Levitre's caliber in a few years and sign a mid-tier vet to fill in as a starting LG for now but be a solid backup when the youngsters ready, we invest may 3 mill per instead of 8. And since were likely starting a rookie QB anyways, why pay 8 mill next year for top notch LG play when it will be wasted anyways? Then in 2014 when it may actually matter you have a youngster ready to be a solid starter while still on his rookie deal.

With all our holes, the fact that much less expensive G's can start without sacrificing too much, and the fact that this next year is all new coaches, schemes, playbooks to learn, and probably a rookie QB, it all adds up to Levitre leaving.

Personally, I would have liked to have had him back but it makes plenty of sense.

Please show me the rookie or even 2nd year QB's that went to the playoffs with 8 mill dollar LG's. Maybe they are out there but the Dalton example certainly wasn't.

I just read that the Bills NOW have $16.8 Million dollars in cap space. They could have certainly afforded to keep Levitre with plenty of cap room to spare. And the more inexperienced a QB is, the better it is to have an EXPERIENCED GOOD OL in front of him

[X-Era]

I just read that the Bills NOW have $16.8 Million dollars in cap space. They could have certainly afforded to keep Levitre with plenty of cap room to spare. And the more inexperienced a QB is, the better it is to have an EXPERIENCED GOOD OL in front of him
Yet I gave an example where a rookie QB went to the playoffs with some mid-level LG.

[better days]

Yet I gave an example where a rookie QB went to the playoffs with some mid-level LG.

Well, I missed where you said that. WHO? And SO WHAT? I am saying the Bills could have well afforded to keep Levitre & in my opinion they should have.

[BillsFever21]

Yet I gave an example where a rookie QB went to the playoffs with some mid-level LG.

And there are plenty of examples of teams that went to the SB with good guards. Just this year as one example.

[X-Era]

And there are plenty of examples of teams that went to the SB with good guards. Just this year as one example.
Please show me how losing Levitre prevents us from going to the playoffs with a rookie QB or even a 2nd year guy.

Only point I'm making. Having a top 5 or 10 LG is not a pre-requisite for the playoffs.

No, were not going to the playoffs this year. But theres logic in thinking that losing Levitre was irrelevant to that equation so the 8 mill per can be better spent to speed up when we finally do get there. That's my opinion.

[X-Era]

Well, I missed where you said that. WHO? And SO WHAT? I am saying the Bills could have well afforded to keep Levitre & in my opinion they should have.
I'm totally fine with that answer man. I liked him too and would have liked him back in the fold.

But, let's admit that it would have been a want-to-have and not a have-to-have. Personally, I feel a QB is a have-to-have and without that we might as well save the money for when we can make a legit push to win the SB.

[jdaltroy5]

You build through the draft. But should always be on the lookout for guys that can fill holes now with decent contracts and can at the minimum be solid backups if/when your young guy develops.Yes, you build through the draft. The key to building through the draft is actually re-signing the few good players you actually do draft though.


Unfortunately, we can't fill all the holes this year. The cap is basically flat so you have to look at the best balance of players vs. the cap. And this team, with no starting QB, no starting quality LB's, no starting quality SS, 2 holes at WR including a true #1/#2 type cannot afford to sink 8 mill per in a LG. Especially when they got solid play out of other teams cast-offs like Pears and Urbik. That right there shows that the premise that you cannot get solid OL play from anything other than a 1st or even 2nd round OG is false.Of course it's false. Probably because no one ever said it. Are Urbik and Pears serviceable? Sure they are. But they aren't as good as Levitre and Wood.


The high draft pick investment is usually on LT's, RT's, C's, and then G's in that order.And? I'm not saying that OG is more important than OT or C. I'm saying that you can't compare OG to a waterboy or cheerleader like some of you want to.


Nothing is as linear as it's made out to be here and strategy is the name of the game. If we can find a day one starting LG who has potential to be at Levitre's caliber in a few years and sign a mid-tier vet to fill in as a starting LG for now but be a solid backup when the youngsters ready, we invest may 3 mill per instead of 8. We're talking about a 5 million dollar difference in the HOPES that the other guy will ONE DAY be as good as Levitre? And if he is, then what? Let him walk because he wants too much money?


And since were likely starting a rookie QB anyways, why pay 8 mill next year for top notch LG play when it will be wasted anyways? Wasted? How does that make any sense at all? Ya, you don't want to have a top notch OL when you have a rookie QB. They should be running for their lives and having their confidence crushed. It builds character.


Then in 2014 when it may actually matter you have a youngster ready to be a solid starter while still on his rookie deal.Yeah, hopefully. We all know how Buddy's mid round picks turn out. Don't hold your breath.


With all our holes, the fact that much less expensive G's can start without sacrificing too much, and the fact that this next year is all new coaches, schemes, playbooks to learn, and probably a rookie QB, it all adds up to Levitre leaving.Except you are sacrificing a lot. Despite what you guys want to believe, you aren't going to get even close to the same calibre of play by plugging in some mid level rookie.


Personally, I would have liked to have had him back but it makes plenty of sense.

Please show me the rookie or even 2nd year QB's that went to the playoffs with 8 mill dollar LG's. Maybe they are out there but the Dalton example certainly wasn't
Give me some examples so I can compare.

Last year, the Giants, Pats, Ravens, Saints, and Broncos were all in the top for OG salaries. Clearly they understand the importance of the position.

It's ok though, we probably know better than those teams though.

[X-Era]

Not doing this thing you guys are doing responding to specific quotes.

Wasted- spending top dollar on a player in a year where it won;t make much difference and at a position where it doesn't drastically affect your fortunes.

This is a team game and at LG even if you take a big hit on level of play, overall the hit isn't as large as it is at say QB.

Sea, Indy, Cinnci, Minn, Wash. All have mid level LG's and rookie or 2nd year QB's yet went to the playoffs. 49'ers have Iupati. I like him so I'd consider him an up and comer.

You listed teams with top 10 or 5 every year QB's in the league.

[BillsFever21]

Please show me how losing Levitre prevents us from going to the playoffs with a rookie QB or even a 2nd year guy.

Only point I'm making. Having a top 5 or 10 LG is not a pre-requisite for the playoffs.

No, were not going to the playoffs this year. But theres logic in thinking that losing Levitre was irrelevant to that equation so the 8 mill per can be better spent to speed up when we finally do get there. That's my opinion.

Outside of a top QB there isn't any single position where one player can make a huge difference. Any young QB's best friend is a good OL though. Considering Levitre was a good and reliable lineman for us you can't disregard. Even through all of the injuries with Woods, Glenn and others Levitre was the mainstay and our line stayed competitive.

I'm not saying Levitre was our ticket to the playoffs since this is a horrible roster as it stands. That's why it's good to keep your best players around that you already have. It's not like we spent the money wisely to improve the team. We overpaid for a #3 level CB in McKelvin when you compare his money to other contract this year CB's who are much better then him. Then we signed Manny Lawson with the rest of the difference.

We didn't bring in an impact player and a more important position with that money. We chose to sign a couple marginal players at best yet we still need a starter at them positions and now we need to find a new starter on the OL to go along with it. Then the advocates for getting rid of Levitre talk about drafting a guard in the 1st or 2nd round to replace him. Either that or a tackle and kicking Glenn inside. That shouldn't even be an option with all the MAJOR holes we have.

If we had taken that 7.8 million dollars and brought in one of the younger impact players at a position of need then that would've been different. We used that money for a couple marginal players that won't make a big impact on the team and we are still looking for starters at that position when we could've filled the #3 CB slot with a cheap middle round draft pick. Even if McKelvin ends up as the #2 it's not because of his skills since that's already been proven. The best CB's in FA only got around 5-5.5 million and we gave a backup over 4 million dollars. His return ability doesn't make up for all that money.

So where is the great upgrades with that money that you boast about? There hasn't been any and there won't be. We didn't get one upgrade with that money and all we did in the process is open up another one of our many holes.

[cookie G]

I don't like that plan, but at least it is logically consistent with not valuing the guard position.

That's basically what it comes down to.

It isn't what good offenses do...as has been shown by Balt., NE, NO, Den, NYG, Atl...etc.

But we're the Bills....we don't think like that. We still hold up to these silly nontruths like "you don't pay X amount for a Guard" and "you can get these guys in later rounds" or "I wouldn't draft one before the 4th round".


The evidence of how good teams treat their Oline is out there...people just choose to ignore it. The funny thing is..in this thread, before FA started, I'd have people asking me..."what if we get so and so as a replacement for Levitre? He'll be cheaper."

Well, that plan went out the window. I guess the 33 year old Brandon Moore is still out there. And I suppose we'll see a 5th round draft choice on day 3 of the draft.

We had a chance at a decent line. Something you could build on. They could have added another piece to make it very good. It'll get worse.

Wood isn't going to hang around next year, and this same discussion will be continued.

On the good side, we have our kick returner and punt returner locked up...for over $7 million.

It is about priorities. You'd think 13 years of no playoffs would get people to change their priorities.

[jdaltroy5]

Wasted- spending top dollar on a player in a year where it won;t make much difference and at a position where it doesn't drastically affect your fortunes.Well no one was advocating signing Levitre to a one year deal.


This is a team game and at LG even if you take a big hit on level of play, overall the hit isn't as large as it is at say QB.No one said it did.


Sea, Indy, Cinnci, Minn, Wash. All have mid level LG's and rookie or 2nd year QB's yet went to the playoffs. 49'ers have Iupati. I like him so I'd consider him an up and comer.I'm not saying you CAN'T win without a LG. I'm saying that if we're going to go with a rookie QB, we might as well give him the best opportunity to succeed.

And Iupati isn't an up and coming OG. IMO he's already one of the best in the league.


You listed teams with top 10 or 5 every year QB's in the league.Yes, they do have top 5 or 10 QBs, but my point is that these were smart teams that spent money on their OG. They certainly don't seem to think that you can just plug any OG in there.

[X-Era]

Outside of a top QB there isn't any single position where one player can make a huge difference. Any young QB's best friend is a good OL though. Considering Levitre was a good and reliable lineman for us you can't disregard. Even through all of the injuries with Woods, Glenn and others Levitre was the mainstay and our line stayed competitive.

I'm not saying Levitre was our ticket to the playoffs since this is a horrible roster as it stands. That's why it's good to keep your best players around that you already have. It's not like we spent the money wisely to improve the team. We overpaid for a #3 level CB in McKelvin when you compare his money to other contract this year CB's who are much better then him. Then we signed Manny Lawson with the rest of the difference.

We didn't bring in an impact player and a more important position with that money. We chose to sign a couple marginal players at best yet we still need a starter at them positions and now we need to find a new starter on the OL to go along with it. Then the advocates for getting rid of Levitre talk about drafting a guard in the 1st or 2nd round to replace him. Either that or a tackle and kicking Glenn inside. That shouldn't even be an option with all the MAJOR holes we have.

If we had taken that 7.8 million dollars and brought in one of the younger impact players at a position of need then that would've been different. We used that money for a couple marginal players that won't make a big impact on the team and we are still looking for starters at that position when we could've filled the #3 CB slot with a cheap middle round draft pick. Even if McKelvin ends up as the #2 it's not because of his skills since that's already been proven. The best CB's in FA only got around 5-5.5 million and we gave a backup over 4 million dollars. His return ability doesn't make up for all that money.

So where is the great upgrades with that money that you boast about? There hasn't been any and there won't be. We didn't get one upgrade with that money and all we did in the process is open up another one of our many holes.First off, CB, RB, and WR are all spots besides QB that a player can make a big impact on your squad. Huge? Depends on how you define it. But you state OL even though there are 5 of them and G is the least critical out of the 5.

Second, we didn't overpay for McKelvin IMO.

Thirdly, you're not getting a young impact player (at a impact position) for 7.8 mill per. That's not the reality these days. And you need to go back and look at McKelvin's contract, it wasn't strictly 4 mill per.

Fourthly, there haven't been any big signings so far and there may not be. I don't know why. But since you can roll over any unused cap room and we have all new coaches and schemes, the Bills may look at this as a eval year. They may want a full year to figure out what they really need and then will go and get the right guy. Just a guess.

[X-Era]

That's basically what it comes down to.

It isn't what good offenses do...as has been shown by Balt., NE, NO, Den, NYG, Atl...etc.Here we go again with listing teams with proven franchise QB's.

If you can somehow show how these teams are good offenses mainly because of their LG's and not their QB's I'll buy this argument.

And again, I gave you 4 teams that went to the playoffs with rookie or 2nd year QB's with mid-level/no-name LG's.

[BillsFever21]

First off, CB, RB, and WR are all spots besides QB that a player can make a big impact on your squad. Huge? Depends on how you define it. But you state OL even though there are 5 of them and G is the least critical out of the 5.

Second, we didn't overpay for McKelvin IMO.

Thirdly, you're not getting a young impact player (at a impact position) for 7.8 mill per. That's not the reality these days. And you need to go back and look at McKelvin's contract, it wasn't strictly 4 mill per.

Fourthly, there haven't been any big signings so far and there may not be. I don't know why. But since you can roll over any unused cap room and we have all new coaches and schemes, the Bills may look at this as a eval year. They may want a full year to figure out what they really need and then will go and get the right guy. Just a guess.

You can't get any of them at an impact position for that much? Dumervil is a damn good impact player at an impact position and his contract averaged 7 million a year.

As far as McKelvin's contract goes you can say that with every contract in the NFL. Even with Levitre's. When you compare his numbers with better CB signings this year he was overpaid. His contract was 4yrs and 17 million. Sean Smith is a much better proven CB and got 3 yrs and 16.5 million.

Other examples are Tim Jennings last year with for 2yrs and 7.6 million. Aquib Talib only got 5 million dollars for one year. Chris Houston for a 5 million a year average. Kelvin Hayden the #3 CB in Chicago(behind two good CB's) didn't even get a million dollars for a one year contract. The Bills jumped the gun way too soon on McKelvin and could've had him much cheaper. He isn't close to the player any of the other guys are. With the trouble vets are getting receiving big contracts this offseason they definitely overpaid.

[X-Era]

You can't get any of them at an impact position for that much? Dumervil is a damn good impact player at an impact position and his contract averaged 7 million a year.

As far as McKelvin's contract goes you can say that with every contract in the NFL. Even with Levitre's. When you compare his numbers with better CB signings this year he was overpaid. His contract was 4yrs and 17 million. Sean Smith is a much better proven CB and got 3 yrs and 16.5 million.

Other examples are Tim Jennings last year with for 2yrs and 7.6 million. Aquib Talib only got 5 million dollars for one year. Chris Houston for a 5 million a year average. Kelvin Hayden the #3 CB in Chicago(behind two good CB's) didn't even get a million dollars for a one year contract. The Bills jumped the gun way too soon on McKelvin and could've had him much cheaper. He isn't close to the player any of the other guys are. With the trouble vets are getting receiving big contracts this offseason they definitely overpaid.Dumervil is 29. He's not "young". He's not old but not young either.

Sean Smith is not proven to be much better man. If you don't like McKelvin or us re-signing him that's fine, just state it that way. But claiming that some other mid level CB is "much" better is arguable at best and far from a given.

None of the guys you listed are far and away better than McKelvin. None are proven solid #2 CB's.

[BillsFever21]

There are two discussions going on here. Some people think that no guard is ever with 8 million, full stop. That's a question of scheme and positional value. Some people are saying that a guard might be worth 8 million, but Levitre isn't one of them. That's a question of Levitre's individual skill. I personally disagree with both of those.


Docker and Walker were bad signings because they sucked out loud. Walker could have been salvaged if they put him at RT, where he belonged, but they decided he had to be an LT because POSITIONAL VALUE and when he couldn't play that we cut him.



Of course they are, people love a bigtime pass rusher. Mark Anderson is a massive liability against the run and realistically a 3rd down option only, and he got $20 million from the Bills because he had 10 sacks the year before.



I gave my definition of priority. Nix has used one high pick on an OL, the rest have been UDFAs, late rounders, and players poached from practice squads. Compare that with how he built the defensive line: High 2nd and 3rd rounders in his first year, the #3 pick and a large contract to Kyle Williams in year two, and $120 million in DEs in year three. Which one do you think he values?



Are you dense? Of course I like how the OL played. That's why I want to keep the unit together. We finally, after years of wandering in the desert, have an OLine that opens holes for our backs and keeps our QBs upright and now we let the best player go and his backup.



Fine.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/nfl/2009/10/post_7.html



So answer the question. Given an identical contract, would you sign with Dallas or Buffalo? How many 26 year olds would agree with you?



You're acting like I'm opposed to signing players for less money. I would have loved to sign Levitre for less than market value. The difference is that I am also willing to sign him for market value rather than just letting him walk. If we had made some move to aggressively improve another area of the team then I could maybe understand the move. But we instead spent the money signing guys like McKelvin and Manny Lawson.

Some people think a team of marginal players is the better way to go. You pay your core of good players and you find cheap guys to fill in for your #3 CB slot or other dime a dozen players like McKelvin and Lawson. Some think that McKelvin and Lawson is more important to the team then one good player while opening another hole in the process.

These guys won't answer that question though. They say we can't afford to keep Levitre because we can get a player at a more impact position. When you tell them that we spent that money on McKelvin and Lawson instead of getting an impact player at another position they either don't reply or they say they are good deals. They want to prioritize the money and you need to but they think that's a good way of doing it.

Either that or they say you can't get an impact player for 7.8 million a year even though Dumervil only received 7 million this season and other good players got less then that. After the top players like Wallace, Jennings, etc went off the board the rest of the guys aren't getting much money. Well if you "couldn't" get another impact player for that money then it must not be very much and it would've made sense to keep Levitre. Some are just contradicting themselves. The best are the ones that want to use a 1st or 2nd round pick to replace Levitre when we have glaring holes everywhere.

Giving guys like McKelvin and Lawson that kind of money when they could easily be replaced and/or upgraded with a cheap draft pick doesn't count as a good contract value in replace of Levitre. Especially this offseason when proven players are having trouble even getting 3-5 million a year.

Had we used that money to get Byrd locked into a long-term deal or signed an impact player at another position that would've been different. We haven't done either and used the money on two dime a dozen players instead. That's been the Bills method for years and some still think that's the key to building a team. Signing more guys like Chris Kelsay to extensions or contracts when their level of production could be filled much cheaper.

Buddy Nix and the Bills just keep proving that they can't determine the value of a player correctly. They give Fitzpatrick a horrendous contract and he is released a year into it. Then they give Mario Williams 15 million a year and Mark Anderson 5 million a year when guys like Dumervil are being signed for 7 million a year the following season. They are just drinking the Kool-Aid of OBD and can't look at things in the real world.

[BillsFever21]

Dumervil is 29. He's not "young". He's not old but not young either.

Sean Smith is not proven to be much better man. If you don't like McKelvin or us re-signing him that's fine, just state it that way. But claiming that some other mid level CB is "much" better is arguable at best and far from a given.

None of the guys you listed are far and away better than McKelvin. None are proven solid #2 CB's.

Sean Smith isn't a dominant CB and I never said he was but he has been proven to be a much better reliable starter. He has played much better then McKelvin and McKelvin couldn't even consistently stay in the starting lineup on the worst defense in Bills history and we have continued to try and draft CB's to fill his spot. All that and he is still worth almost as much as Sean Smith. It's funny you only used Sean Smith as an example too with all the other guys listed.

I guess Tim Jennings isn't really any better then McKelvin either and he only got 3.5 million per season last year. Talib isn't any better then McKelvin either. I guess if you play for the Bills it automatically makes you a better player in some fans eyes. You're just thinking of a couple PR touchdowns and you're forgetting about how bad he played even as a #3 CB. He is more in the Kelvin Hayden range and Hayden only received around a million dollars.

I'm sure you were probably one of the people *****ing almost every week about how bad McKelvin was and now all of a sudden when we re-sign him to a contract he really isn't that bad. You can't have it both ways. I guarantee you if we hadn't re-signed him and the Patriots or Jets did you would be singing the praises of getting rid of him and how stupid they were for giving him that type of money.

[BillsFever21]

We also keep reading about how Levitre won't make a difference with us making the playoffs so why waste the money on him. If that's the case then how is using that money on guys like McKelvin and Lawson any different? We didn't save the money from letting Levitre walk we just shuffled it around for a couple bad players who are a dime a dozen in the NFL. Is McKelvin and/or Lawson going to make a difference on our team and make a big impact to win us games over the next few years? That's what I thought.

[cookie G]

Here we go again with listing teams with proven franchise QB's.

If you can somehow show how these teams are good offenses mainly because of their LG's and not their QB's I'll buy this argument.

And again, I gave you 4 teams that went to the playoffs with rookie or 2nd year QB's with mid-level/no-name LG's.

Yep...here we go again...pointing out what the good teams do..and how it is contrary to your theories.

And we don't have a QB, do we? Is that because we had a good guard in Levitre, or is it because we keep drafting...oh, never mind.

But since you brought up these other teams:

SF has a 1st rounder playing guard;
Seattle has 1st round pick Carpenter playing guard, next to 2nd round pick Max Unger, backed up by 3rd round pick John Moffit;
Cinci has 1st round pick Kevin Zietler playing guard along with 3rd round pick Trevelle Wharton.

So out of the playoff teams you mentioned, 3 of them have a 1st round pick playing guard. All are on their rookie contracts.

Go figure.

And in addition to the teams I mentioned (the good offenses who pay at least one interior lineman top dollar), the teams YOU brought up have 1st round picks on the interior. Some have high round picks playing one of the other interior positions.

Now...

Is any of this beginning to sink in? Can you see a pattern here?

It isn't that teams say, "damn...we need a guard and we need to pay him a ton"...it is that the good teams are understanding that merely having a good LT isn't enough, not when you neglect the rest of the line.

Teams ahead of the curve are beginning to draft on the oline by talent rather than position. And the good offenses only let good talent go when they are going to replace it (i.e. Baltimore and New Orleans)

That's not us.

[X-Era]

We also keep reading about how Levitre won't make a difference with us making the playoffs so why waste the money on him. If that's the case then how is using that money on guys like McKelvin and Lawson any different? We didn't save the money from letting Levitre walk we just shuffled it around for a couple bad players who are a dime a dozen in the NFL. Is McKelvin and/or Lawson going to make a difference on our team and make a big impact to win us games over the next few years? That's what I thought.
You're right, it is what you thought. I simply don't share your view.

If you were looking for big impact on wins, that wasn't going to be Levitre either.

Players like McKelvin and Lawson fill starting roles (albeit as a #3 CB for McKelvin) at half the cost and have just as much or just as little impact to the overall success of the team depending on your perspective. But instead of having one starter who isn't that relevant to the teams fortunes, we have two. And on a team with many needs for starters I can see that logic.

I'd be fine with signing Levitre at 8 mill per if we had most of the pieces, few holes, and 8 mill to spend still. If we could go into a off-season needing one starter or two I'd be fine with expecting to get that from the draft and spending our available FA cap money on just Levitre. But we weren't in that situation.

[X-Era]

Yep...here we go again...pointing out what the good teams do..and how it is contrary to your theories.

And we don't have a QB, do we? Is that because we had a good guard in Levitre, or is it because we keep drafting...oh, never mind.

But since you brought up these other teams:

SF has a 1st rounder playing guard;
Seattle has 1st round pick Carpenter playing guard, next to 2nd round pick Max Unger, backed up by 3rd round pick John Moffit;
Cinci has 1st round pick Kevin Zietler playing guard along with 3rd round pick Trevelle Wharton.

So out of the playoff teams you mentioned, 3 of them have a 1st round pick playing guard. All are on their rookie contracts.

Go figure.

And in addition to the teams I mentioned (the good offenses who pay at least one interior lineman top dollar), the teams YOU brought up have 1st round picks on the interior. Some have high round picks playing one of the other interior positions.

Now...

Is any of this beginning to sink in? Can you see a pattern here?

It isn't that teams say, "damn...we need a guard and we need to pay him a ton"...it is that the good teams are understanding that merely having a good LT isn't enough, not when you neglect the rest of the line.

Teams ahead of the curve are beginning to draft on the oline by talent rather than position. And the good offenses only let good talent go when they are going to replace it (i.e. Baltimore and New Orleans)

That's not us.Carpenter was drafted as a RT and was a reach as was Zeitler. and Moffit, not Carpenter is listed as the starting LG. If we want to move OT's to LG, I'd like to try that too. I feel like Hairston has good feet for OT but could be really good as a G.

Regardless, none are being paid 8 mill per, none are top 10 G's.

The argument is that we should pay for a top 10 LG and need one to be a playoff team. That's simply not the case. And the teams were talking about are succeeding due to the QB not the G.

The other assumption is that we have somehow neglected the rest of the line. Yet we had 1 1st rounder, 2 2nd rounders, and a 3rd rounder (Urbik) starting out of the 5. Were now down to 1 1st, a 2nd's and a 3rd out of the 5. No, I don't consider Urbik to a guy that we invested highly in. But he was a 3rd rounder and now is our starter.

But I also don't think we have neglected the OL either. We drafted a G, C, and OT's and ended up getting quality players.

What we did is let a 8 mill per G walk. But in all your "examples" of successful teams only two have a 7+ mill per G and that's NO (Grubbs) and NE (Mankins). Both have top 5 QB's and it's possible both go to the HOF. Den, Sea, Cinnci, SF all have LG on their rookie contracts. Maybe that's what we should do rather than pay top dollar...

If you go back and look I have said I'd like to draft Brian Winters in the 4th round. I'd be alright with addressing it as early as the 3rd or even 2nd round depending on who it is.

If the argument is that we just liked Levitre and wanted him to stay, I agree. If the argument is that he's critical to our success or that we need him to get to the playoffs or beyond I don't see the evidence for that.

[psubills62]

There are two discussions going on here. Some people think that no guard is ever with 8 million, full stop. That's a question of scheme and positional value. Some people are saying that a guard might be worth 8 million, but Levitre isn't one of them. That's a question of Levitre's individual skill. I personally disagree with both of those.
Gee, I hadn't noticed.


Docker and Walker were bad signings because they sucked out loud. Walker could have been salvaged if they put him at RT, where he belonged, but they decided he had to be an LT because POSITIONAL VALUE and when he couldn't play that we cut him.
They would have been fine signings for less money. Sounds like a lot of FA signings.


Of course they are, people love a bigtime pass rusher. Mark Anderson is a massive liability against the run and realistically a 3rd down option only, and he got $20 million from the Bills because he had 10 sacks the year before.
I would disagree. Maybe some people on message boards "love a bigtime pass rusher," but I would think for a position to be sexy it has to extend beyond that.


I gave my definition of priority. Nix has used one high pick on an OL, the rest have been UDFAs, late rounders, and players poached from practice squads. Compare that with how he built the defensive line: High 2nd and 3rd rounders in his first year, the #3 pick and a large contract to Kyle Williams in year two, and $120 million in DEs in year three. Which one do you think he values?
Well, given that I've personally spent the last three years doing an analysis of Nix's drafting habits and given that I use two variables to describe "priority": quality and quantity, I'd say he values DL, DB's and OL. The first two are quality priorities, the last two are quantity priorities (DB's are both). So if you want to define it only in terms of quality, then fine. But there's other definitions as well.


Are you dense? Of course I like how the OL played. That's why I want to keep the unit together. We finally, after years of wandering in the desert, have an OLine that opens holes for our backs and keeps our QBs upright and now we let the best player go and his backup.
I find it interesting that you're very happy with a bunch of guys that Nix somehow cobbled together, two were just street pickups that are getting like 2-3m per year, while Hairston, who is at the least a major contributor, is a 5th round pick. Yet you seem to have no confidence that the Bills can fill one hole without paying 8m/year. Whatever floats your boat.


Fine.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/nfl/2009/10/post_7.html

Those are good quotes. Props for finding them.

Though the original request was "one quote from a free agent saying he went because of the big stadium." Either way, nice work.


So answer the question. Given an identical contract, would you sign with Dallas or Buffalo? How many 26 year olds would agree with you?
What's the situation? Am I a year away from free agency playing for Buffalo? Because I'm pretty sure that's the discussion here. I'd personally sign with Buffalo, and I have no idea how many 26 year olds would agree with me. I know we got Stevie Johnson, Mario Williams and Mark Anderson (who was 28) to sign with us, so it seems like there's enough who are coming to Buffalo.


You're acting like I'm opposed to signing players for less money. I would have loved to sign Levitre for less than market value. The difference is that I am also willing to sign him for market value rather than just letting him walk. If we had made some move to aggressively improve another area of the team then I could maybe understand the move. But we instead spent the money signing guys like McKelvin and Manny Lawson.
It's not Levitre that seems to be the issue anymore. You seem to have some big problem with the team looking to draft well and then sign guys before they reach the market. That's what the plan should be, as it is for every team. As for spending the money, I'd like to see it spent too, personally.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

I would disagree. Maybe some people on message boards "love a bigtime pass rusher," but I would think for a position to be sexy it has to extend beyond that.

Watch Sportscenter. Some plays are going to appear every time: Sacks, passing TDs, rushing TDs, interceptions, etc. Those guys play the "sexy" positions. People see Mark Anderson pull off a great move and sack the QB, but they don't seem to remember Anderson pulling that same move and letting the HB run by him because he wasn't playing his contain.


Well, given that I've personally spent the last three years doing an analysis of Nix's drafting habits and given that I use two variables to describe "priority": quality and quantity, I'd say he values DL, DB's and OL. The first two are quality priorities, the last two are quantity priorities (DB's are both). So if you want to define it only in terms of quality, then fine. But there's other definitions as well.

Fine, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one as well, because I don't see throwing wagonload of UDFAs at a problem to be treating it as a priority.


I find it interesting that you're very happy with a bunch of guys that Nix somehow cobbled together,

Nix didn't "somehow cobble" the line together, he inherited a line that had Levitre, Wood, and Bell already anchoring the left side. When Bell walked for more money (a move I didn't disagree with - the guy couldn't stay healthy), Nix used a high 2nd pick to find our LT in Glenn. Now, on the right side he's run a parade of guys through trying to find the right fit. He finally did after 3 seasons.


Hairston, who is at the least a major contributor, is a 5th round pick.

He is a fine backup swing tackle. One key flaw in the Bills plan is consistently assuming that guys can punch above their weight class. Donald Jones is a fine #4 or #3. We played him as a #2. Arthur Moats is a fine backup linebacker, we tried to make him a starter. And so on.


Yet you seem to have no confidence that the Bills can fill one hole without paying 8m/year. Whatever floats your boat.

Oh, I'm confident that the Bills could fill the LG hole with Warmack at #8, but that would be completely insane and a huge waste of resources.


Though the original request was "one quote from a free agent saying he went because of the big stadium." Either way, nice work.

So you literally want me to find someone saying "I signed here because of the stadium and for no other reason!" ? Dallas is a marquee franchise, the stadium is one aspect of it, but the crowds, the prestige, and the primetime exposure are the far bigger reasons.


What's the situation? Am I a year away from free agency playing for Buffalo? Because I'm pretty sure that's the discussion here. I'd personally sign with Buffalo, and I have no idea how many 26 year olds would agree with me. I know we got Stevie Johnson, Mario Williams and Mark Anderson (who was 28) to sign with us, so it seems like there's enough who are coming to Buffalo.


Yes, Mark Anderson and Mario Williams. Didn't you hear the dump trucks full of money we backed up to their houses? Sure free agents will happily come to Buffalo if we keep burying them in cash until they submit, but that's not the way to do things right?


It's not Levitre that seems to be the issue anymore. You seem to have some big problem with the team looking to draft well and then sign guys before they reach the market. That's what the plan should be, as it is for every team. As for spending the money, I'd like to see it spent too, personally.

Yes, if there's one thing I hate, it's when Buffalo drafts well and signs guys below market value. Is there any chance we could coax Chris Kelsay out of retirement so we could pay him more money?

[BillsFever21]

Watch Sportscenter. Some plays are going to appear every time: Sacks, passing TDs, rushing TDs, interceptions, etc. Those guys play the "sexy" positions. People see Mark Anderson pull off a great move and sack the QB, but they don't seem to remember Anderson pulling that same move and letting the HB run by him because he wasn't playing his contain.



Fine, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one as well, because I don't see throwing wagonload of UDFAs at a problem to be treating it as a priority.



Nix didn't "somehow cobble" the line together, he inherited a line that had Levitre, Wood, and Bell already anchoring the left side. When Bell walked for more money (a move I didn't disagree with - the guy couldn't stay healthy), Nix used a high 2nd pick to find our LT in Glenn. Now, on the right side he's run a parade of guys through trying to find the right fit. He finally did after 3 seasons.



He is a fine backup swing tackle. One key flaw in the Bills plan is consistently assuming that guys can punch above their weight class. Donald Jones is a fine #4 or #3. We played him as a #2. Arthur Moats is a fine backup linebacker, we tried to make him a starter. And so on.



Oh, I'm confident that the Bills could fill the LG hole with Warmack at #8, but that would be completely insane and a huge waste of resources.



So you literally want me to find someone saying "I signed here because of the stadium and for no other reason!" ? Dallas is a marquee franchise, the stadium is one aspect of it, but the crowds, the prestige, and the primetime exposure are the far bigger reasons.



Yes, Mark Anderson and Mario Williams. Didn't you hear the dump trucks full of money we backed up to their houses? Sure free agents will happily come to Buffalo if we keep burying them in cash until they submit, but that's not the way to do things right?



Yes, if there's one thing I hate, it's when Buffalo drafts well and signs guys below market value. Is there any chance we could coax Chris Kelsay out of retirement so we could pay him more money?

You mean them teams with average guards that he mentioned have high draft picks playing that position? Don't confuse people with facts.

[jdaltroy5]

The argument is that we should pay for a top 10 LG and need one to be a playoff team. That's simply not the case. And the teams were talking about are succeeding due to the QB not the G.That's not the argument. No one is saying that we NEED one to be a playoff team. We're saying it would help.


The other assumption is that we have somehow neglected the rest of the line. Yet we had 1 1st rounder, 2 2nd rounders, and a 3rd rounder (Urbik) starting out of the 5. Were now down to 1 1st, a 2nd's and a 3rd out of the 5. No, I don't consider Urbik to a guy that we invested highly in. But he was a 3rd rounder and now is our starter.
Again, no one is saying that either. In fact, it's just the opposite. We actually started investing high picks on the OL and (shockingly) the OL started playing well. That's why it makes no sense for people to just think we can plug any ol' mid round pick in there and expect the same results.


What we did is let a 8 mill per G walk. But in all your "examples" of successful teams only two have a 7+ mill per G and that's NO (Grubbs) and NE (Mankins). Both have top 5 QB's and it's possible both go to the HOF. Den, Sea, Cinnci, SF all have LG on their rookie contracts. Maybe that's what we should do rather than pay top dollar...But as someone else mentioned, those teams spent high picks on their guards. To expect the same results, we'd have to spend another high pick on an OG. If you haven't noticed, we have some other glaring holes that might need our high picks on.


If you go back and look I have said I'd like to draft Brian Winters in the 4th round. I'd be alright with addressing it as early as the 3rd or even 2nd round depending on who it is.So say we spend a 2nd rounder on an OG and he turns out to be as good as Levitre. What happens when his rookie contract is up? Just let him walk and use another high pick?


If the argument is that we just liked Levitre and wanted him to stay, I agree. If the argument is that he's critical to our success or that we need him to get to the playoffs or beyond I don't see the evidence for that.No one is saying that he's critical to our success. We're just saying that when you have a team with a serious talent problem, you try to retain that talent.

[psubills62]

Watch Sportscenter. Some plays are going to appear every time: Sacks, passing TDs, rushing TDs, interceptions, etc. Those guys play the "sexy" positions. People see Mark Anderson pull off a great move and sack the QB, but they don't seem to remember Anderson pulling that same move and letting the HB run by him because he wasn't playing his contain.
I've watched plenty of sportscenter and sacks are shown sometimes, but much more rarely than TD's. Sorry, DE is hardly a "sexy" position. Sexy positions are the skill players (mostly on offense) - QB, RB, WR, maybe DB. It's laughable that anyone would consider a trench position "sexy." DT's get sacks too, so they must be a sexy position, right? Real rich.


Fine, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one as well, because I don't see throwing wagonload of UDFAs at a problem to be treating it as a priority.
Um, you do understand what UDFA stands for right? The whole "undrafted" thing is kind of the opposite of Nix drafting a whole bunch of guys.


Nix didn't "somehow cobble" the line together, he inherited a line that had Levitre, Wood, and Bell already anchoring the left side. When Bell walked for more money (a move I didn't disagree with - the guy couldn't stay healthy), Nix used a high 2nd pick to find our LT in Glenn. Now, on the right side he's run a parade of guys through trying to find the right fit. He finally did after 3 seasons.
A parade? You mean like 3 guys for 2 spots? 60% of the line are guys Nix brought in, and most of the major contributors (yes, major contributors) have been street free agents, low-round picks, etc. It's also pretty convenient that you forget that the OL was doing just as well before Glenn was drafted (with Bell only playing 7 games).


He is a fine backup swing tackle. One key flaw in the Bills plan is consistently assuming that guys can punch above their weight class. Donald Jones is a fine #4 or #3. We played him as a #2. Arthur Moats is a fine backup linebacker, we tried to make him a starter. And so on.
Thanks for the lesson. I would actually agree with most of the examples you bring up, except Hairston did a decent job.


Oh, I'm confident that the Bills could fill the LG hole with Warmack at #8, but that would be completely insane and a huge waste of resources.
Only Warmack at #8? How easy it is to forget Levitre was a late 2nd round pick. Urbik was a waiver pickup. Yeah, I guess it's impossible to fill that spot without spending a top ten pick to overdraft someone.

You don't seem to understand that yes, this OL was cobbled together. It did just fine before Glenn, with guys like Hairston filling in, guys like Pears and Urbik as starters. Even Rinehart did just fine as a starter. But it's so impossible to replace Levitre without spending a first round pick. Whatever you want to think.


So you literally want me to find someone saying "I signed here because of the stadium and for no other reason!" ? Dallas is a marquee franchise, the stadium is one aspect of it, but the crowds, the prestige, and the primetime exposure are the far bigger reasons.
The "...and for no other reason" is a nice strawman addition. You were the one who brought up the stadium and whatnot as reasons free agents go there. So I simply asked for a quote. Gee, I'm sorry for asking you to actually support an argument. I gave you credit for finding the quotes you did.


Yes, Mark Anderson and Mario Williams. Didn't you hear the dump trucks full of money we backed up to their houses? Sure free agents will happily come to Buffalo if we keep burying them in cash until they submit, but that's not the way to do things right?
And nobody else wanted those guys, right?


Yes, if there's one thing I hate, it's when Buffalo drafts well and signs guys below market value. Is there any chance we could coax Chris Kelsay out of retirement so we could pay him more money?
Deflections are fun.

Well, I've gotten all I need to out of this conversation, given that you refuse to address the issue that I originally brought up. You have some issue with the strategy that every NFL team follows, but that's not my problem. Have fun.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

I've watched plenty of sportscenter and sacks are shown sometimes, but much more rarely than TD's. Sorry, DE is hardly a "sexy" position. Sexy positions are the skill players (mostly on offense) - QB, RB, WR, maybe DB. It's laughable that anyone would consider a trench position "sexy."

It's a high-visibility position. Guys who get sacks get paid. You surely know Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis, right? They both played aggressive ball for the Colts for several years, which led to them getting a lot of sacks and a lot of accolades. But they also ran themselves by a lot of run plays over the years, which is one of the reasons the Colts always struggled against power football teams.


A parade? You mean like 3 guys for 2 spots? 60% of the line are guys Nix brought in, and most of the major contributors (yes, major contributors) have been street free agents, low-round picks, etc. It's also pretty convenient that you forget that the OL was doing just as well before Glenn was drafted (with Bell only playing 7 games).

It's pretty convenient that you skipped right over the line where I said Bell was anchoring the left side until we let him walk.

And yes, there have been a parade of people through that OLine

Kirk Chambers and Geoff Hangartener were on the team when Nix took over, both were let go. Then we had Jamon Meredith, Mansfield Wrotto, Cordaro Howard, Ed Wang, Kyle Callaway, Mike Jasper (a college OG), Mark Asper, and Chad Reinhart all cycling through in less than 4 four years. 10 players to fill two starting slots? Yeah, that's a parade. Then of course we have Colin Brown, Sam Young, Chris Hairston, and Zebrie Sanders, who are still on the roster backing up Urbik and Pears.


Thanks for the lesson. I would actually agree with most of the examples you bring up, except Hairston did a decent job.


He did a decent job as a fill-in. I'm not convinced that just because he did we for a few games at a time that he's ready for a 16 game season.


Only Warmack at #8? How easy it is to forget Levitre was a late 2nd round pick. Urbik was a waiver pickup. Yeah, I guess it's impossible to fill that spot without spending a top ten pick to overdraft someone.

You want to spend a 2nd rounder on a guy in the hopes that he becomes as good as the guy who just left. That's the definition of a treadmill pick. We're never getting better by that strategy, just endlessly trying to keep up with the holes we open.


The "...and for no other reason" is a nice strawman addition. You were the one who brought up the stadium and whatnot as reasons free agents go there. So I simply asked for a quote. Gee, I'm sorry for asking you to actually support an argument. I gave you credit for finding the quotes you did.


Actually I brought up the crowds, the fanbase, and the primetime games, you're the one who's fixated on the stadium. But no TRUE scotsman puts sugar in his porridge, am I right?


And nobody else wanted those guys, right?


OF course they wanted those guys. Why else do you think we spent so much money trying to lure them away from better franchises?


Well, I've gotten all I need to out of this conversation, given that you refuse to address the issue that I originally brought up. You have some issue with the strategy that every NFL team follows, but that's not my problem. Have fun.

I've addressed the issue several times, you're just too thick to figure it out. Drafting well is great. Signing guys below market is great. But if you fail the first two, letting the talent you DO draft walk just because they don't play the right position is idiotic. You need to have a base of talent to build around. Sure, it would be great to have all your talent in the "right" positions, but blame Nix for changing the defense twice in 4 years, necessitating that we constantly throw picks at the D and miss talent like Rob Gronkowski, Andy Dalton, and Colin Kaepernick.

[Bert102176]

They are gonna tie clothes line from the center to the tackle and we can see defenders being clotheslined all game long

[cookie G]

Carpenter was drafted as a RT and was a reach as was Zeitler.

Of course they were reaches. Teams aren't supposed to draft guards in the 1st. I heard that somewhere.

Therefore, they were reaches.


and Moffit, not Carpenter is listed as the starting LG.

Carpenter started until he got hurt. He was put on IR in December.



If we want to move OT's to LG, I'd like to try that too. I feel like Hairston has good feet for OT but could be really good as a G.

That would save a lot of money. More to invest in our special team standouts.



Regardless, none are being paid 8 mill per, none are top 10 G's.

They're on their rookie contracts. You said these teams had mid-level/no level guards.

Again, it isn't right.



The argument is that we should pay for a top 10 LG and need one to be a playoff team.

No, the argument is how much a team is willing to invest on the interior of the OL. It can be done through paying for them, or drafting high, or a combination of both.

And yet the examples provided by you show they are willing to put in a little more investment into the interior of the line than you'd want to.

I think you're examples are down to...Minny.

That's
NE
NO
Balt
SF
Sea
Cinci
NYG

against....Minnesota.



That's simply not the case.

Well...that's it then. Good offenses, playoff teams vs....some strange dogma that started god knows where (Donahoe maybe?). Dogma wins out.

Bills lose.



And the teams were talking about are succeeding due to the QB not the G.

Well its a good thing these good teams have money and high draft picks to waste on guards. And again, it isn't like this team has a QB.



The other assumption is that we have somehow neglected the rest of the line. Yet we had 1 1st rounder, 2 2nd rounders, and a 3rd rounder (Urbik) starting out of the 5. Were now down to 1 1st, a 2nd's and a 3rd out of the 5. No, I don't consider Urbik to a guy that we invested highly in. But he was a 3rd rounder and now is our starter.
But I also don't think we have neglected the OL either. We drafted a G, C, and OT's and ended up getting quality players.



NO, as others have said, I've been really pretty happy with Levitre, Wood and Glenn. It was a great step in the right direction.

Wood's gone next year. Now you're down to ...Glenn. In case you hadn't been watching, Wood is the one that helps out Urbik in pass pro. He rarely helped Levitre. With Wood having to help out the Colin Brown more...that leaves Urbik a little more exposed. With Wood gone after next year....Urbik's in trouble.



What we did is let a 8 mill per G walk. But in all your "examples" of successful teams only two have a 7+ mill per G and that's NO (Grubbs) and NE (Mankins).

Jahri Evans makes close to Mankins..
Chris Snee makes about 7;
Marshall Yanda makes over 6.
Denver has about 11 million invested between Kuper and Vasquez.
That's off the top of my head.

[QUOTE=X-Era;3770390]
Both have top 5 QB's and it's possible both go to the HOF. Den, Sea, Cinnci, SF all have LG on their rookie contracts. Maybe that's what we should do rather than pay top dollar...

I'd be fine taking another guard high. Except we don't have a QB either.

I'd be fine taking an Eric Fisher and moving Glenn inside.



And we still don't have a QB. And we have 1 WR.

But they've put themselves in this situation.



If you go back and look I have said I'd like to draft Brian Winters in the 4th round. I'd be alright with addressing it as early as the 3rd or even 2nd round depending on who it is.

They won't. I've seen this play before.



If the argument is that we just liked Levitre and wanted him to stay, I agree. If the argument is that he's critical to our success or that we need him to get to the playoffs or beyond I don't see the evidence for that.

my argument is, and always has been...how much is a team willing to invest in its Oline, and whether they are willing to maintain that investment...as far as Levitre goes..I've always said..."who are you going to replace him with?" Free agency gave the answer I expected.

and as I said, (or really Illuminatis said)...it is a matter of priorities.

As I've said, a guy like Ozzie Newsome continuously drafts high in the Oline. He won't keep everyone, but when a Ben Grubbs leaves, he has a 2nd round pick waiting to take his place.

Because that's a priority with him. He is ALWAYS on the lookout for quality linemen. The dude lives off OL-D7 in the 1st 2 rounds of the draft, with a WR or RB thrown in every so often.

What we are with our defensive backfield, he is to OL.

Think of your thread about the most important positions...he'd probably have CB and G flipped.

[Night Train]

Draft one of the 3 stud LT's, instead on reaching for a QB at #8. Kick Glenn inside and the OL is solidified. Pick your QB in Round 2.

There. That wasn't so hard.

[coastal]

Please people... stop saying "kick Glenn inside"!

96% of you know nothing about Glenn's skill set, let alone how it would translate into the guard position.

so please... just knock it off.

[DraftBoy]

Please people... stop saying "kick Glenn inside"!

96% of you know nothing about Glenn's skill set, let alone how it would translate into the guard position.

so please... just knock it off.

Yea that All-American status at OG tells you nothing about his ability to play OG at a high level.

[coastal]

Yea that All-American status at OG tells you nothing about his ability to play OG at a high level.
All-American is a skill set?

stop pretending to be in the know. It's embarrassing.

[DraftBoy]

All-American is a skill set?

stop pretending to be in the know. It's embarrassing.

Oh this is certainly embarrassing. We 100% agree there.

[coastal]

Oh this is certainly embarrassing. We 100% agree there.
You don't like me... that's okay though.

I'll grow on you.

[DraftBoy]

You don't like me... that's okay though.

I'll grow on you.

I like you plenty.

[better days]

Because well or good isn't good enough. He was considered the best OG in the country in college, his game is best suited as road grading OG. Can he play LT? Yes he proved that this year but why not put your players in the best position for them to succeed? If you get a shot at say Joeckel at 8, do we really want to pass on that value because we don't want to kick Glenn inside or even to RT?

Drafting a Joeckel at #8 might be a good option for a GOOD team that has no holes to fill & is just looking to upgrade.

The Bills are NOT that team however. They have MANY holes to fill including the CRATOR at the QB position.

IMO, better use could be made of the #8 pick to fill a hole, rather than upgrade. Keep Glenn at LT, draft a guard after the 1st rnd.

Use the #8 pick on a QB or even a WR or CB and that would do more to improve the team than a possible upgrade at LT.

[X-Era]

Don't know where you're getting this stuff.

1) Carpenter was drafted as a OT and played there his rookie year
2) What I meant by mid-level G's was that they are not top 10 in the league G's. That's what Levitre is and is being paid that way.
3) The more difficult thing to quantify is what losing Levitre and replacing him with either an average LG from FA or a draftee will really do to the fortunes of the team.
4) IMO, the QB position more than any other affects the fortunes of the team.
5) I have never said I have a problem with drafting a G in the 2nd round or beyond. I can't hate the idea of taking one at 8 but I'd rather go in a different direction.
6) I happen to like a guy who may be there in the 4th round in Brian Winters. I also like the thought of Pugh moving to G.
7) I also would like to try a guy like Hairston at LG and see what he can do. It's the same argument for moving Glenn to G... won't be a stud at LT but could be a stud at LG.

[Mace]

I guess with all due respect to posters that have been here longer than I have, I keep thinking how terribly we did at replacing guards between Brown and Levitre, which was years and a lot of people, though guards are easy to replace in whatever rounds, and we had to try draft picks, converted tackles, fa's and whatnot, sort of over and over again because guards are easy to replace, but we sort of just couldn' do it well. It seems ill advised to do this all over again when we were done with it already and we have other problems.