Planning to attend the game against San Diego with my family.  Any advice on obtaining 3 tickets for the game, where to stay (do we know where the Bills and/or Bills Fans stay), whether Qualcomm-Chargers are safe for an 8 year old (crazy Bills fan) boy, other advice?  Not too worried about costs -- a rare event to go see our beloved Bills and join the fans in SD.   Sorry if this is not the place to ask this question -- somewhere else?

At the beginning of the season, I decided to find 5 positives during each loss this year.  Unfortunately, I have been doing this regularly.   As I said in the beginning, I will always be a loyal Bill -- and I just can't read all the negative (although accurate) stuff after a loss that make me question my commitment.  So, here I go again to identify 5 positive things (usually players) I saw in the game (and no jokes):

1.  Offensive play-calling.  The checkdowns worked!  The reason for that was that they went deep and targeted Owens and Lee a lot more early in the game -- didn't matter if they caught it -- the defense moved back a few steps.  This is what Van Pelt/Edwards has to learn about playcalling.  You have to open up the field before you do a lot of screens and short passes.

2.  Edwards has the talent.  The first 3 quarters were very competitive.  And that was because the playcalling was unpredictable and Edwards was making all the different throws (mixing it up).  If you looked at the OL for the Titans and the OL for the Bills, you could really see that it is totally unfair to blame Edwards -- he had no time, while Young had as much time as he wanted -- and despite that, he performed well.  Edwards looked like he had all the skills until the last quarter (yes, he was terrible after that). 

3.  Andy Levitre at tackle -- actually, McKinney at Guard.  I don't disagree with Brian that Levitre may not be a left tackle in the NFL, but he showed he was good enough  (don't forget that he hasn't practiced at tackle -- ever!) at left tackle to consider him at right tackle.  Frankly, despite all the talk, I have thought he was the weakest OL (along with the turnstile RT).  Good guards are easy to find (McKinney looked pretty good (I forgive his motion penalty since it was early on in his first appearance)) -- if we fill the tackle positions, the guards will perform better.

4.  Jairus Byrd.  Actually, I think he didn't play that well for most of the game.  However, in the center field INT (anyone could catch that interception), he just happens to be in the right spot.   The great thing about Byrd is that he (and thus the Bills) are starting to have the reputation of takeaways if you go deep -- so, the opponents are going to go deep less.  The field has shrunk -- that makes the defense more efficient.  This actually has happened (I don't see as many deep plays) -- but then we better stop the run........

5.  Action Jackson.  I actually like it that Lynch carries most of the balls (he gets the tough yardage).  Jackson can't do it all, so the Bills correctly are letting him do what he does -- returns, wildcat, receiving, limited carries.  For some reason, Lynch cannot catch anything that is a short distance between him and the QB (hands of stone), which was not his reputation (maybe in Cal, it was much more of an open offense).  On the other hand, Jackson is a great athlete and can do everything.  We need to use him for the special teams, the trickery (his TD pass looked better than most QBs!), the short passes, and the Lynch relief.  Actually, I am always surprised that Lynch and Jackson take turns per series -- I think Lynch should be the 1st and 2nd down back and Jackson be the 3rd down back. 

Frankly, I thought the Bills played pretty well in the first half.  Unlike many other defeats, I was more pleased with their overall play.  I thought the offense, in particular, looked semi-solid for most of the game.

There weren't many positives, but I'll try to identify 5:

1.  Nic Harris as LB.  He looks like a LB -- has he gained size?  He seemed to be all over the place (probably not a good sign for the DL).  Perhaps his future at LB is starting as of this game.  Certainly more meaningful than Palmer in the first few games.

2.  Fred Jackson as K/PR.   Really looks like a patient returner.  He moves so fluidly in the beginning part of his return to find the right hole.  I think it works better than Parrish's freak, juke, twist and mad scramble -- one man show.  I am thinking that it helps the special team unit (re: penalities) to know that he is running with the squad and that he will follow their path.

3.  Pozluzny.  Seemed like he was an island a lot of the time, left to chase and tackle on his own.  Speed showed, just need others with him.

4.  Florence.  Props again for DF.  Johnson really didn't do much, and Florance just adds size and close coverage even when they catch.  On the same note, McGee didn't look his usual self in tackling -- perhaps his injury still bothers him.

5.  Byrd.  Of course.  His interceptions are mistakes by the other side -- but that is what opportunities are all about.  Every time he INTs, I think of Donte cringing and saying he could have done that -- no, Donte, you wouldn't have been looking at the ball, you would have been trying to make a ESPN highlight pounding hit on the receiver (and forego the INT).

Well, I said last week that in every loss, I would try to come up with 5 legitimate (non-joking) positives to hang on to.  This week is going to be pretty hard, just like every loss.

1.  Jarius Byrd is all over the place.  He is a perfect FS.  Even putting aside the INT (should have been the game changing, winning play), he seemed to be in on a lot of plays.

2.  Keith Ellison deserves apologies from his doubters.  He has been very dependable, and often the last line of defense that, if not for him, would result in a big offensive play by the opponent.

3.  Terrence McGee is a legit top corner.  He proves that every week.  That was a great extension signing -- I questioned it at first because of our overload in young, talented CBs, but I was wrong.

4.  Brian Moorman.  Boy, I hate that he is alway in the top 5.  That's not good.

5.  Drayton Florence.   Had to go over the list of players and tagged him over McIntyre (!).  I like Florence -- I think he does a better job than McKelvin.  He seems to be good in coverage and in run support.

Every time the Bills lose (yes, it happens a lot), I get so depressed that I don't want to read anything about the Bills for a couple of days.  So, I decided that whenever they lose, I will try to write (find) 5 positive things I saw in the game (I didn't appreciate the BillsDaily's (Bogyo) "Bright Side" blog).

1.  Parrish is being used much better by having him KR, as well as PR.  He looked pretty good (and, frankly, since we lost so badly, we didn't waste one of his big returns in this game).  This saves our more regular players (Jackson, Reed, McGee), while giving us a better threat to break a big one.

2.  Going deep/jump ball is very effective with our two WRs -- it is more productive (and less a INT risk) than to go short with Owens and Evans.   We should just do that all the time.  Reed is a very dependable slot receiver -- don't use Owens or Evans for the short passes.

3.  We have not yet lost to an AFC East team at home.  Yes, we needed to beat an East team, and yes, we only have one more away game (with the Jets).  I have no answer to those points.  But, we have not yet lost to an AFC East team at home (yet).

4.  Drayton Florance might be a better CB at this point than McKelvin and was a very good acquisition.

5.  Demetirus Bell is a legit Left Tackle.  He's certainly our best tackle.

I am just an avid fan -- and I really appreciate the others on this board who know much more (and can see/analyze more) than I can when watching a game.  I have a few random questions and concerns that I appreciate your guys' thoughts on:

(1)  I did not see Kelsey make one play.   Did I miss it?  Maybe when Schobel gets back, we put Denney on the other side.  I guess Ellis is just a complete dud since he sees virtually no action even when there is a shortage of DEs.
(2)  Is Stroud fading each week?  He really shined in the first few weeks and now seem very ordinary.  Is he missing Schobel that badly?  Johnson also seems to have lost his energy when he comes in. 
(3)  Schobel really is missed -- I guess he really is the only Pro Bowler on the defense (I never thought I would say this because I thought he was overrated).
(4)  Poz seems to be blocked easily.  He now can't shed a tackle and they go right at him.  Is this something the offenses are figuring out?

(5)  Where are the blitzes?  Veek or Scott seem to be very effective, but against an 'ol Farve and an ('ol Pennington; also, an 'ol Warner), I didn't think they blitzed much at all -- and oddly the short passes still worked wonders for them.  Poz seemed like a poor blitzer, and Veek performs better when he is asked to do special things and not just stay back. 
(6)  Whitner just seems a bit lost -- does he have too many responsibilities he is shouldering (no pun intended)?

(7)  Should the Bills just cut McIntyre?

(8)  Why don't we do any reverses with Parrish?  I would think he would be the one guy in the league who is ideal for that (especially since he appears to be a below average receiver).

(9)  We need to go long on offense a few times -- isn't that what gives opportunities for the short passes?  Did the Jets basically cheat-up the safeties because we have fallen in love with the short-accurate passes of Edwards?  Even our "long" runs (did we have any?) were fairly short because of this.

 A few player personnel moves for thought (not about actual play calling, since I defer to others who are much more knowledgable).  I say these half in jest, but this team is very special and such a team should always think about fine tuning:

1.  Activate Chris Ellis and give him some time by subing out Schobel.   Kelsey and Denny are doing their part.  Schobel has disappeared.  I don't recall any plays that Schobel made -- and I don't recall Schobel anywhere near my tv when Steven Jackson was running.  Ellis is apparently good at putting the pressure on the QB.  We get more pressure from the LBs (Poz, Veek), DTs (Williams, Johnson) and DBs (Youboty, Whitner, Scott) then Schobel.  Love to get a Ron From NM type of play by play analysis of Schobel (is he being double teamed a lot -- I frankly didn't see too many of that).  

2.  Bench Peters until after the bye (I guess that means only the Arizona game).  Pretty obvious to me -- if we lost any/all the last 3 games, he would have been the main goat in each one of them.  Also, that will put him in his place for pulling the hold out stunt.  Move Walker back to LT and Chambers to RT until the bye -- work on Peters' fundamentals.

3.  Play Jackson along with Marshawn for half the plays; the other half, play one back.   Forget the FB for most plays.  Instead of opening holes, they just seem to clog and crowd the running lanes.  I think Oman should be considered to be deactivated.  Didn't Lynch look injured (or just slow to get up) in every play?  We have got to preserve him a little.

4.  Bench Fowler and see what Duke has.  Fowler is a center who always gets pushed back, while the FB eats up valuable open space has made the middle impossible to get through.  I think he is handicapping the rest of the OL -- he just can't handle the big DTs, or the fast DTs, or the blitzing LBs.  He backs up so quickly that he tackles our own QB.  I don't recall too many plays where our RBs got through the middle -- I do recall many plays where our RBs first go to the middle, then has the smarts to decide to better break outside.  By the way, Butler always seemed to me to be a candidate for Center -- just an impression I have.  Duke just seems so much better than last year.  And he is a lot bigger than Fowler.  In any event, I think both are in their last year of contract.

5.  Bring in a veteran LB.  I am really concerned about Corto and Costanzo being the backups (to Ellison!).  What happens if Poz or Veek get injured?  Our team should not be in the fate of DiGiorgio.

I said before that great teams win games they should lose.  They win games they struggle in.  They win games through luck and bad luck.  They also win by getting better and not being complacent.  The opponents see a weakness and they exploit it more and more.

My quick look at available, experienced OTs (perhaps some of them have been picked up):

Wayne Gandy (Atl), Fred Miller (Chi), Tom Ashworth (Seattle/NE), Stockar McDougle (Jacksonville), Nat Dorsey (Cleveland), Kyle Turley (KC/StL), Todd Steussie.  They are all old timers -- perhaps the immediate short term plug we need.  I think NE actually picked up 2 veteran OTs in the past few weeks.

I doubt that waiver wires will present much other FAs at this point in the preseason, and we need bodies right now, I guess. 

The more I think of it, the more I am getting excited over finding a catching TE from one of Teyo Johnson and Courtney Anderson.  They are actually the same player -- same height, (6 foot 6 inches!!!), weight (260-70), catching ability, age (27), Oakland-tradition.   Even their performances over the years are about the same (really, lack of opportunity -- perhaps with good reasons).  I gather, given the draft and FA acquisitions, that the Bills will choose one of the two to be our receiving TE -- and both these guys are taller, bigger and better catchers than most TEs (its the other stuff they are so flawed at).  Johnson has a better bloodline resume (Stanford, 2nd round pick, WR background) and Anderson has better performance in the pros (was he the reason Teyo was benched in Oakland -- but not by much).  It will be interesting who comes out as the "extra" wide receiver we have been looking for.  My bet is on Teyo Johnson, but I presume the early money is on Courtney Anderson.

I generally agree with MARV's comment that there won't be a lot of trade partners in the early draft.  But the new trade charts re-value the picks based on the rediculous contracts of the first 10 picks, so the adjustments in expectation may help.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/04/15/new-draft-trade-chart/

Also, one area of the draft that has more appeal for a trade up (by another team) is that second level in the 1st round (to get the 2nd best player at a position, for a relatively cheap price (you don't pay top 5 or top 10 money, and the difference between late teens and 11th pick is not so great considering you get the guy you want) -- apparently, a mixture of OT (Albert, Clady, Otah, Williams), RB (Mendenhall, Stewart) and DE/LB (Harvey, Rivers), and CB (any of the top 4) happens to be the very same focus for each of Denver, Carolina, Chicago, Detroit, Arizona, Minnesota and Houston.  So, moving down a few spots can be the difference between getting the number 1 guy you want and losing him to the team ahead of you.  

Possibly more importantly, as the "new" chart would have it, there is a perfect match as to trade values (those teams can give their 1st and 3rd for our pick), that will faciliate the trade. It values the 11th pick at 1,320 points and makes a mid-1st and 3rd rounder a perfect match in points.  

As examples, Detroit (looking at say, OT or Mendellhall) and Minnesota (OT or Harvey) are two very good possibilities -- the chart tells us that if we move down about 4 spots in the 1st round with Detroit, we could get their 1st (15 pick) and 3rd (76 pick) -- and the points favors the Bills only a tiny bit (only by 30 points); move down 6 picks with Minnesota, at get their 1st (17 pick) and 3rd (they have two -- 73 pick) -- that favors Minnesota by a tiny bit(only by 25 points).

So, a 3rd round pick is what we could get if we move down a few spots (I think, in the old system, it may have been a 2nd rounder) -- I think we let those teams salivate at (and think of losing) Harvey (move ahead of Denver to "steal" him), Clady/Albert (Carolina might grab him) and Mendenhall, trade down and grab Devin Thomas (we have no choice but grab the best WR we can).

I just want to vent.  I agree that CB or Harvey might present the best value over WR.  But we really don't have a choice anymore.  Can the Bills start spending a little bit of money, picks and attention on our lousy Offense?  I will be upset if we use our 1st rounder on a CB or DE -- they may present better value (even much better), but, unfortunately, we have no choice but to get a WR with the 1st pick because our team has absolutely ignored the Offensive side of the ball this post season.  First, to start out with, our defense was much better than our offense last year.  Secondly, based on the majority of the season, we have already added for this new season, in addition to Stroud, Johnson, Mitchell and James (why does everyone forget we added a starting caliber CB who was sought after by many teams?), the return of Denny, Simpson, Poz from injuries (pretty much missing the entire year), plus a more experienced McCargo, Youboty, Wilson, Wendling -- and we really haven't lost anyone on defense!  Harvey, Carson, DMC, McKelvin, Rivers, etc. may all be great, and we SHOULD have been in a position to draft one of these (much) better value guys, but we chose to get cute with our negotiations with the Panda (I know I will get some grief over this statement, since many are now claiming that we actually were not interested in him (but I seem to recall during those 10 days of his free agency, we were all holding our breath, getting a day-to-day status report checking all the internet reports on whether the Panda was signing with the Bills).  Frankly, can you imagine how much we would have loved our draft strategy today had the Bills signed the Panda?  Given where we are, what about spending the top picks on the offense (where we had not lost anyone to injuries last year (and was still lousy), where we have not added a single decent body in free agency?  Not only do we desperately need a WR, we actually have lost Price (our No.2!) and Aiken without replacing them!  I realize that we could "steal" a WR in the 2nd round because, in hindsight, say Hardy or someone falls to us (or Jordy Nelson is really a 1st round quality that only the Bills know about and we grab him in the 3rd round) -- my point is that we don't have that luxury anymore (I wish we did).  We can't risk not getting a WR who will help us this year.  I say that if we don't love a particular WR at 11, move down to the teens (every team from 12 to 17 are looking desperately at either the 2nd rated OT or RB or Harvey or CB), and draft that WR (Thomas or Sweed) with the number one pick.  We have no choice.  Oh yeah, by the way, we have Evans signed only for this year!  We then have to get a TE by the 3rd round.  Sorry for my rambling, but I am getting very concerned (because the Bills do odd things) that OBD might be listening to our Carson/Harvey talk. P.S., I actually love Josh Reed.

I am excited about the FB position.  This board hasn't really discussed it much as a need or relating to the draft.  I want to see a smashing, path-clearing FB who can catch a bit of the dump offs; we should not look for a hybrid guy who can run with the ball.  I would have to think that we will draft a FB, and, with one of the 2 4th round picks, we should use it to draft the best FB (can't imagine a FB going before that) -- not wait until 5th or later.   Is Owen Schmitt that guy?  I hear that Patrick Hillis, and I know Jacob Hester, are more of a ball carrying FB.  Is there anyone else?  Frankly, we should grab the best one (not settle for less) and not worry about picking too early -- this is a chance to make a dramatic improvement to our run-blocking and short passes.

I realize this is now a dead topic, but I just wanted to vent for the last time on the Panda issue.  The news that Bryant Johnson signed a 1-year $2 million contract with SF instead of Buffalo is an odd one, if reports are to be believed that Johnson really preferred to sign with the Bills for a 1-year deal.  All reports are that Buffalo was offering a long-term deal instead (maybe 5-years, $16 million?).  Johnson's agent must have offered a 1-year deal similar to that of SF that Buffalo rejected.  How could the Bills reject this?  Usually, it is the player that wants a long-term deal (I recognize that he wanted a bigger contract and is hoping for one after this 1-year tryout).  Buffalo, even if it preferred a long-term deal, obviously wanted Johnson (enough to offer a long-term deal) and should have been ok with a 1-year deal ($2 million, instead of a $4-$5 million long-term average).  A 1-year deal would have allowed for the Bills to draft a WR in round 1 or 2 and develop him for a year, while trying out Johnson -- and with minimal money committed on Johnson ($2 million is really low for a No.2 WR), the Bills could easily extend Evans and draft a WR.  Frankly, a 1-year deal at $2 million (other than the notion of locking a WR we really like for cheap) would have worked out great for the Bills.  It certainly would not have made a dent in our cash-to-cap, nor the salary cap (even if you divide the salary cap by the number of players, it is greater than $2 million).

McGahee may be one of the great Bills of all time if we get Stroud for a 3rd Round Pick.  He already gave us Trent Edwards with the 2007 pick.  Now, possibly Marcus Stroud (or Rogers?).  Plus, he allowed us to draft M. Lynch.  No current Bill has made such a contribution.  We owe him a lot!  He also would have led the move to Toronto.  Imagine the Toronto home game if he were with the Bills -- they would give him a standing ovation, and the move would be sealed.

I like the idea of using our picks as currency to get the players we want, since we are losing only non-starters in FA, and the team already is so very young -- we don't really have room for 10 new rookies (and they can't perform right away, anyway).  If Jauron wants Rogers, the Bills should consider swapping 1st round picks (go from 11 to 15) and give Detroit one of the 3rd round picks (doesn't really matter which one) for Rogers.  This way, the Bills essentially are giving the equivalent of an early 2nd round pick value, which will top any other offers for Detroit.  The move down a few spots may not hurt us and it may make all the 1st round picks we are looking at that much more attractive (since most of them appear to be available then, anyway) -- I am talking about any LB (Rivers, Conner), WR (Sweed, Kelly), DT (Balmer) or CB (Jenkins, McKelvin, Talib, Rogers-Cromartie) being available at 15 or 11.  Detroit has more "need" positions in LB, DT and OL (we are, after all, not losing a single starter and are very young to begin with), where a move up will be attractive.  I also like the idea of using the leftover 3rd round pick to move up on the 2nd rounder we have.  Imagine if we trade for Rogers, pick up Crumpler at TE, and draft Sweed in the 1st and Conner in the 2nd (using the other 3rd along with the 2nd to movve up to get him) -- with all of our starters returning.  We still would have many draft picks (including FA-loss additional draft picks) to fill out the subs lost in FA, anyway.

Does anybody know exactly what Losman's contract says about his final year (what this trigger is for the $5 million (!) boost in base salary)?  This makes no sense for a late 1st round pick, but everyone seems to "know" that this is affecting the decision on who to start.  Another reason why this doesn't seem to make sense is that if there were such a provision in his contract, I would think it normally applies to his entire term as a Bill -- if so, he basically has missed about 50% of his time so it is hard to imagine that this bonus trigger element is actually at play.

Also, how is Takeo doing?  I gather London Fletcher is doing well, and Clements is, as usual, playing individually well (but not the team).  For an article, can we ask the various team writers (S.F., Philly, Washington) how the vet players we let go are doing?  Thanks!

Let's use our 6th and 7th we received from Philly to trade for PacMan and Chris Henry.  They fill our 2 biggest needs in a lockdown (not literally) CB and a tall/fast 2nd WR.  I think Tenn. and Cinn. would take anything for them -- probably would free them anyway when their terms are up.  We should also claim Tank when he gets out to fill our biggest need at DT -- he is our perfect Cover-2 DT.  These are our top needs, and these 3 are phenom talents and very young.  With this line up, we'll be super bowl contenders for the next 5 years, especially if we have a "non-character" win-first policy -- I bet they'll be willing to sign for relatively cheap (and face no real market for their services).  All the dogs in Buffalo will have to stay inside, but Vick might be worth a look, as well.  By the way, isn't there a LB in Green Bay that just beat up a woman . . .

By the way, I am kidding -- but I did notice that they all play (and are perfect fits) at our position needs (which makes it even tougher for us, since those teams need to fill those spots).