Fake-Fat Sunny

No, he would have longed used up his four years of eligibility.

I think McGahee is already a great pick by TD. Taking the plunge for an RB deemed a top 5 talent before his injury because he had correct faith in the Bills docs that he would be able to take the lead RB role after a year's plua recovery time made this a great pick. Reading the market correctly that he could pass on filling the Bills DE need until his second pick so that he could take the WM plunge was simply a phenomenal and gutsy read of the market. Knowing that TH was a ticking timebomb personally and keeping this under wraps as a rep for him (despite some very negative actions and comments by TH) was a fine read of a player and TD and the Bills sticking to their guns and eventually trading TH for a first day draft pick after his draft day plans went down the tubes was a great piece of GM led work as well. Having the opportunity to make the WM pick because the Bills simply took Arthur Blank and AT to the toolshed for Peerless was nothing short of a phenomenal get. WM is a great pick who may not work out if he gets hurt or never does exceed beyond his current very good performance to a level that demands a Pro Bowl pick. However, the reasonable choices it seems to me are WM turns out to a great pick that worked out if he makes the has a Pro Bowl season eventually or merely he was a great pick that did not turn out as well as we wanted. However, the pick is already is an extremely good piece of GM led work whether it works out as a good pick as it has to date or a extremely fortunate pick if he continues to excel for the Bills. TD ain't no where near perfect. MW was a bust. Josh Reed was a pick who did very good his first year and then went south as a player. The jury is still out on Losman's fate and wether Evans will take the Reed or Moulds route. However, only those who are biased against TD regardless of what he does would identify the events that surrounded the WM pick as anything but a great piece of GM led work that is at least good, reasonably can be called very good and still could be great in terms of results for the Bills.

I think that you make a key point in folks understanding that the argument had digressed from making real points because posters are mixing different arguments and even going beyond this confusion to merely pick the arguments which support their point even though these points are "apples and oranges" which cannot be mixed and leave their argument consistent and coherent. For example, the discussion that this thread started with as to what was the best draft pick made by TD. This decision is certainly legitimately argued over an assessment of how good a particular player is, but a comparison between whether TH or WM are better players is different than the point of whether TD made a good draft pick taking them. For example, it is arguable whether Tom Brady or Peyton Manning is a better QB. but since Brady came with a 6th pick and Manning took a 1st, it is not even arguable at all which one is the better draft pick. The discussion quickly turned from its orginal draft assessment to arguments over how good of a player WM really is. The point is clearly key and related but it is simply different. Overall, I think WM was a great pick by TD for several reasons which are related to but not driven by an assessment ofWM as a player. 1. Need vs. BAP- One of the key pieces of the ying/yang of draft assessment is that some GMs are primarily driven by a desire to satisfy need while some are driven by a devotion to get the best player available. IMHO, no GM follows the same rule on this all the time (or likely he will not be a GM for long as slavish devotion to this general rule will at some point result in a GM passing on an obvious need to get a player he deems BAP or passing upon and obvious great player to get a lesser player who fills a need). The WM pick was a great one because TD was able to both get a possible BAP (WM was seen pre-injury as a top 5 pick with the #23) and still fill the Bills need for a DE by getting Kelsay (whom few would have complained if TD took him with the #23 pick) in the 2nd round. His decision to do this ended up being a correct decision because he trusted in the Bills docs who made the correct call that WM could rehab into a lead back for the Bills. Since it seems to have worked out that he got a top 5 (or so) pick with a #23 and filled our need for a DE who became a starter, its hard to see how he could have done better with his first two picks. 2. The Cap implications- This was a great move by TD not only because of the raw player value but how this played out in terms of cap management. By signing the injured WM at #23, he not only got a talent judged by many to be a top 5 pick and in reality got a lead RB with the #23, but got this potential top 5 guy at the #2 pay slot. In addition, he lowered the cap hit for Kelsay from a 1st rounder as many envisioned him to a second rounder. He simmply managed the cap well with his choices. 3. Surprise This is actually a major factor in the draft (surprises a couple of years forced a team (MN I think) to pass on their draft choices for a pick due to confusion and arguments. I think it was a good management job by TD that he overturned some strategy of opponents with a pick that surprised. Many pundits demonstrated their non-understanding of football and team building because they did not realize that TH's prescense and good year prior was what made the WM pick make sense rather than making it unecessary. He led the team in making poor player assessment with the MW pick and like all GMs not only far from perfect but actually really screws up sometime, but the WM pick was simply a great one and as long as the call by the Bills docs has been justified by him actually rehabbing the blown out knee, I think he deserves great credit for making one of the best draft decision of the past decade in how he managed this situtation.

The Bills are not playing chicken with anyone with him this off-season as an EFA by agreement between the NFL and NFLPA has no leverage and the team owns him. He will gain limited leverage after next season when he becomes an RFA in the 2007 off-season, but even in this case his leverage will be greatly limited by the Bills submitting a qualifyiing offer for him which is at a level quite affordable for the Bills if he proves to be a reliable starter at tackle after 3 years in the league. Only a small number of players have attracted offers from teams as RFAs and they have been both lemons or have done well but the teams who lost them were compensated heavily by the CBA. Losing Peters is not worry for the Bills for a couple of years and even then the team will still have the leverage to sign him to a long--term deal should they choose to.

WM is no where near being the best RB in the NFL, but the real joke would be the Bills wasting a draft pick on an RB of the future when clearly the better team building strategy would be to fill a need in the trenches rather than attempt to find an RB who might one day be great to replace our current RB who is not the best of all RBs but is very good.

My sense is that while both are essential to making Indy the team they are (and we will see after the playoffs how good this team is- they have more potential than any team I have seen since the 1985 Bears, but potential merely means you haven't done anything yet like win an SB or even appear in one) that Polian is way more important to this team getting where they are. Don't get me wrong Manning is a great QB. He is better than I have seen than any other QB at various aspects of the game and is easily the best QB I have ever seen that never appeared in an SB (as far as total career goes, Marino is the best passer I have ever seen who never won an SB and kelly is the best QB i haveever seen who never won one. Their accomplishments with their teams simply puts them in a different league for comparison that Manning has achieved). I'm not arguing at all that Manning has fatal flaws, I'm just arguing that since it is simply a fact that he has never even appeared in the SB despite the fact he is such a great QB, this only shows how much of a TEAM game this is and points to why Polian is so central to this team. It really is amazing that he has been able to massage the salary cap and build a team which has: 1. One of the best D HC minds in football that has allowed them to compensate spending so much of their cap room on builiding an O which gives Manning the tools to apply his great skills. 2. Done a great job acquiring ST players, back-ups for injuries and negotiating contracts that allow for success with such a huge cap imbalance. 3. Signed and held onto the quirky Vanderjagt who like most kicker his head is in a different place but he is simply money as a kicker. 4. Has signed and held onto Harrison and James who really have allowed Manning to be more than he can be using his great skills. 5. Drafted well and got key players like Freeney to allow this D to become a force. A lot of it rests on Mannings shoulders now and his play will make the difference. If they win it all (particularly if they go undefeated which i judged as uimpossible but that was before they beat the Bengals and Pitts so now it is improbable but certainly possible. If they win it all I think it will be credible to talk about Manning as one of the best QBs ever (though even this will be merely talk justified by possibility until it becomes a reality that he leads his team to multiple wins if you legitimately want to deem him best ever. However, Polian has GM'ed a team to a SB appearnace and laid the groundwork for the Bills appearances 4 years in a row (Butler gets the lionshare of the GM credit for their final appearances byt Polian deseerves some credit for laying the base he used). If he builds this team into one that wins it all, it seems clear to me that while Manning cannot be successful without the work Polian has done, already Polian has been successful without Manning. The key to buiding this team into a potential winner (I would not even call them a special winner of note until they make it to the conference finals again) IMHO was the work Polian has done to allow this team to win and Manning to flourish with his great play.

The thing which seems odd to me is that folks seem to want to reduce this to only two choices. Either McKinnie is a dominant player or he is a turd. Neither seems true to me. McKinnie in his four years has not been the kind of player that you want for the money that he makes. The problem for the Vikes is that they seem to have much bigger problems to deal with than McKinnie. The fact this is true despite BM's bad start as a player, his inconsistent performance on the field and his recent run-ins with the law speaks volumes about how bad the situation is on their team. On the positive side, BM is no where near being a bust however as his current year is his best year and I have heard nothing about how his slotted salary is divided up so that it forces the Vikes into an immediate decision. MW however is pretty close to being a bust though as his current year has not been his best year and his contract is configured in a way that it is likely to force the Bills to pay him even more or cut him.

Reality is simply reality here. A lot of wealth and probably most is not earned it is simply passed on from generation to generation. Even that which is earned there is no proof that inherently rich folks work harder or poor folks do no work at all. I'm sorry if folks seem to have built an entire way of thinking around these assumptions but there is little to no basis in fact of that which they use as a basis of their thinking.

From a statistical perspective much and probably most of the wealth in this country is not actually earned by the hard work of individuals but is actually givrn to slackers who sleep away much of the day. These nefarious individuals are called babies. We are currently in the midst of the greatest transfer of assets from one generation to the next through inheritance. Less than 10% of the US populaion owns well over 50% of the nation's assets in the last stats I can remember. They have or will transfer the lionshare of these assets to their kids did zero to earn it outside of being born into the correct situation and sucking on the correct tit as kids. Some build this wealth and others fritter it away. However, I have seen no legitimate measure which indicates that rich people work harder or that rich people work less. The world is not controlled nor are the actions of any individuals determined by any dogma be it libersl or conservative. The main thing which seems false here is those who claim it is.

BADOL- I really do appreciate the insights of you and others who have more fully formed opinions of McKinnie and his play. I really am seeking infiormation because I have never seen him this year not being a Vike watcher. I base my initial sense of what i can see which is: A. The Vikes overall W/L and how they got there- As best as I can tell on the face of it there is nothing at all dominating about the Vikes offense or team. It is from this point that I begin at a point where anyone claims that an individual playeris key to this offense and is dominating. Perhaps one can claim that he is dominating it is just that his play makes no difference in terms of team results, but this speaks volumes in itself if it is the case. More likely, that player is not really dominating in his play. The Vikes are merely average in W/L at 5-5. In these 10 games, I think one can only site 2 games in which they scored 33 and 27 points as being a result which might be called dominating (it can be that as in the MN game, the Vikes eeked over the 20 point mark which I think of as mere adequacy in the NFL but in this game it was the D that delivered on of their TDs so it is a stretch to call the offenses output in this game against one of the worst teams in the league more than poor really). The starting point for me is a question of whether BM has been dominant this year? My initial answer as one who does not claim to have studied him is that one certainly cannot reach that conclusion based on the team's game results where their O has been average at best overall and actually performed adequateat best and mostly quite poorly if you look at their output in 8 of 10 games. The validation of BM which I am looking for (but certainly do NOT demand or require) is some statistical indication of :ominating" play on his part in order for this judgment to make sense. The stats are probably in this thread and the failing is on me as I have not followed all the many posts in the 8 pages amidst T-Day activity. The point you make of BM having 50 straight starts is a good INDICATOR of probably good play from him. However, this stat is merely an indicator of good play and is no where near "proof" he is dominating. In fact, just as MW has played a lot for the Bills (though not as consistently as BM has played for MN) simply playing is not proof at all of consistently good play. Just as was requested in a post aove by Fezmid what are the stats that even indicate (much less prove) that BM is a dominating player this year. Perhaps Fexmid is just as stupid as me and missed them in this thread, but inquiring minds would love to know. B. The total of a players career- BM may be dominating this year, but for me this estimation comes on his previous play and activities. Like it or not, he needs to demonstrate objective signs of dominating play in a number of clear ways, from a number of outside sources (if he got elected to a Pro Bowl this would and should change the light within which he is viewed) and over a period of time. Right now, BM is a guy who did a significant holdout his rookie year (either rightly or wrongly he did holdout), has had late night/early morning trouble with the law (which may have been boys will be boys or signs of an issue), is part of the sexboat vikes and has not impressed on the field prior to this year. Perhaps BM is dominating this year, and perhaps we all should be forgiving fans and ignore the past and assume he has performed a number of rational acts that were mistrued time and again. However, I am among those fans who are simply skeptical of a claim he is dominating given his past play and events. I can easily be swayed (though some fans seem to never forgive) with stats which indicate he is dominating. I'm just stupid and have not yet even remotely seem these indications. Thus in this context- 1. I see few if any signs of BM being dominating this year and his teams O has certainly not been anywhere near dominating. As far as the QB switch making a difference in BMs play it is clear that the QB switch has conincided with a huge turn around in W/L for this team. Maybe it makes no difference for BM's play but this would seem to indicate that the team's W/L results are somehow separate from the quality of his play. As far as the QB switch impacting the LTs play there would seem on the face of it to be a big difference in what is required for a QB like Culpepper who is renowned for his escapability and the requirement for an OL player to hold his blocks and be aware of the QB's movements or a QB like Johnson who is not nearly as mobile and is a vet and who gets rid of the ball quicker to a good read or by throwing it away because he cannot escape a sack attempt with his legs. It may be that the switch has had no effect on BM but on the face of it unless you want to maintain Johnson and Culpepper play the same game it would seem it would and there is no explanation I have seen to justify this view. 2. My memory of the dispute when McKinnie held out was that it was not over the amount of his contract which is slotted but actually was over the method and timing of payment which can vary a bit from team to team. In addition, this dispute which is not atypical in the NFL turned into a holdout because both the Vikes and McKinnie got feisty and nasty. In general, my attitude is that it takes two to tango in this type of dispute and neither BM nor the Vikes can be totally exonerated in this holdout. 3. Never forget the money if you care about building a good NFL team and want to understand how a good team is built. Forget the money if one is into this merely for star worship or a superficial look. However, the NFL used to be a sport that happened to also be a business and now it is a business that happens to also be a sport. If you care about the reality of the game never forget the money. As far as excusing MW I certainly don't make that argument at all. Because I do not forget the money rather than excusing his play his career, i would advocate the Bills cut him as soon as it fits our cap needs this off-season. There are still 6 games left and who knows at TBD what the relationships really are inside, but barring some miraculous turnaround in the teams OL play in 6 games and his pivotal role in this turnaround I certainly feel the end of the MW era as a Bill is here this off-season and he will be a bust as a pick. Firtunately, for TD I think when one weighs his deeply flawed 2002 draft against some high quality work in the 2001 and 2003 drafts and some good potential in the 04 and 05 drafts which are still too early to judge, overall he has done a good job as a draft leader. Hiw work is not outstanding, but their are some definite highlights that are good and appear above the norm for GMs in the draft aspect of the game.

Badol- My apologies to you and to all who feel I wasted theit time due to my misunderstanding this thread. I have not readthe entire lengthy thing as I have read stuff and posted amidst the very nice distraction of having a college bud in town this Thanksgiving Day. I have gotten away some as my lovely wife occupies our mutual friend and I get to skip the girl talk parts and often use the time to drop in on TSW. I have gone back and done some review (again I have not looked at the whole thread and its arguments as it is quite lengthy and one needs to sort through a lof of ad hominen crap to find the nice football based nuggets which I love TSW for providing. However, my post responded (as usual for me in too great a length) a specific point which Dawwg raised that all the pundits had MW as a top 5 pick and your response that this was wrong. I do not see why this specific point which my post cites as a point which can be determined to be wrong or not does not apply. Looking at the limited language of your reply (wong.!) to the specific point made by Dawwg (all had MW as a top 5 pick) I think my post which does not speak to other issues is not nonsense at all on this point. As best as I can tell I aggree with the point Mort (of ESPN) made about MW in response to a specific question, most draft gurus and watchers had MW rated as a top 7 pick or even higher. There were some negatives stated about MW but few (if any) predicted he would tank as badly as he has and I have not seen anyone who had McKinnie rated ahead of him. My post simply recognized I had not seen all draft pundits (I think the draft is a good tool but is really overrated by us fans as a tool for team-building, the best way to handle the draft that I see is to try to trade away your first for more picks and get a lot of guys in camp where one can see them play real ball and then cut the guys who cannot play your style). My sense is that Dawwg overstated the case in saying EVERYONE had MW as a top 5 pick but really not by much since as Mort says most everyone had him as a top 7 pick, This is an overstatement on Dawwg's part but not an horrendous untruth and not as big an overstatement as to declare him WRONG on this point. I will deal with the larger issue of my sense of McKinnie in a separate post.

One should not allow the correct focus on the bad management decisions made by Ford/GM regarding union benefits overshadow the bad management decision they made in their selection and production of cars and products. The union issue is true but simply is a crutch being used as an excuse to overlook some really poor management decisions and strategies by GM/Ford. Toyota and Honda are kicking their butt and they bought the worst of the European companies in Fiat. Them going bankrupt is actually the way the capitalist system is supposed to work. The pain of a lot of American workers taking it in the shorts because they worked for poor management however, may be more than the politics of the American system to take and we may abandon a capitalist approach because of it.

I aggree that folks are being too harsh in the assessment of Clements. My sense is that while it may be a legitimate "fan" based judgment of him to be PO'ed by his recent play and even more so by his words, this just isn't spund football judgment. Clements is by far the best CB on this team. McGee is good and getting better but is inconsisteht as a cover guy. Vincent has a great brain which translates into him having an outstanding nose for the ball. however, he himself acknowledges the ravages of age none of is escape and made the move to safety himself. His history of injuries over the last three seasons show he is not be counted upon (even as a safety) in more than spots. Greer and King both seem well set up for the nickel job/ Thomas has the talent to play nickel but god and the docs will have more to say about whether he resumes his career than his level of talent. From watching too much football my sense is that Clements occaisonal bad plays are sometimes linked to the arrogance which makes him a very good and Pro Bowl worthy last year CB (trying instictively to INT the ball last year against Jax instead of simply knocking down this 4th down Hail Mary pass) and that Sunday's bad game was probably linked to inattention from him because his team is surprisingly bad, This Sunday's challenge will show us a lot. He will not be inattentive this Sunday and if he pitches a shutdown game against one of the best WRs in the league he probably is one of the best. If he keeps Smith out of the endzone and stops any pivotal catches I think he can be judged to be pretty good even if Smith racks up a few catches and yards as he always does this year. If Smith burns him bad though it deoends on how it happens (for example we do not know if he has some nick or injury slowing him down) it does not look good. My guess is that he will have a lot to prove this weekend and there will be dollars on the line for this FA. Though Smith will get some catches and yards, I think Clements will play well against him. If the result is the same as last Sunday against Chicago where Smith caught 7 passes and put up near a 100 yards but the Panthers did not score a TD, i will likely judge Clements to have had a good game.

This dispute would seem to be fairly easily settled by the facts. Above in this thread someone provided links to a number of draft sites from that year writing either before or after the draft. It included blowhard pundits like Buschbaum, Kiper, Great North and a couple of others and all of them seemed to be pretty hyped on MW being better than McKinnie and MW being a top choice in the draft. The late Buschbaum seemed to be pretty hyped on MW declaring him a shoo-in as a great LT and a team leader and even the doubters from this group declaring him a top 5 pick if one made the judgment he could play LT and a top 10 if you had doubts. This may have been a selective group chosen and BADOL I'm sure folks would appreciate direction to other voices. Dawwg, it sounds doubtful to me that EVERYBODY has MW as a top 5 pick, but if you amend your assertion to ALMOST everybody, what you say seems RIGHT and Badol is WRONG about this debate. Unlike many TSW opinion disputes, this one seems pretty settlable as to who is right and who is wrong if that matters to either of you. Bills Daily provides links to a fair number of sites if either of you cares enough about what you say to do some research.

Sounds like you need to get active in your union and make it do the job it is supposed to do. The whole union stichk seems to be that folks need to get organized or get rolled over. This is true for the individuak whether its corporate management rolling over them or some idiotic union bosses. If you judge the cards, the rules or tradition is stacked against you and you can't win, then no outside party like folks on a bulletin board are going to make a difference and your cries are merely whining an Dust in the Wind (to quote an old makeout song). On the other hand, if you want to fight them and beat them (the union or management idiots) then this voice is with you brudda (to quote Hawaii 5-0) and if you there is something tangible to be done to help you fight, let us know the specifics and i am happy to do what I can.

I think this is in fact a question of Ralph's priorities. I think winning onr before he checks out is one of them, but I really doubt it is the only one (and it is only a guess and probably varies in his mind from week to week) that it is his first priority. Its too hard to win the SB in the NFL and it involves too much luck for anyone to be so foolish as to make accomplishment of this task the key factor which determines success or not. I think that winning one is important to Ralph but have seen nothing objective that would indicate it is the most or only important thing to him. If you have I would love to see the links to him expressing this or any objective evidence that this is true. I think what's likely important to Ralphy (IMHO) in no particular order (as my guess is the order varies at any given moment are: 1. Winning 2. Having the respect of his family 3. Having the respect of his peers (other owners, media, local leaders) 4. Running a good business 5. Having the respect of his employees 6. Having the respect of the community. This really is in no particular order as I think winning to him means making the playoffs, preferably going deep in the the playoffs, preferably getting to the SB and preferanly winning it. Winning it all would be great but simply making the playoffs would be good. However, TD got an extension without even making the playoffs so though this is important it is not essential to have him reward you or be pleased with you. Who knows how the Bills impact on his family life and this is probably the biggest factor in terms of preparations he has made for the fate of the team when he dies. As far as his peers go, my guess is his election to the HOF is the big factor and test here and the record of the Bills now has little impact on this issue. TD has done excellent in running the business for Ralph and though this is not likely sufficient in and of itself to make him happy, it is essentail that it happen. I don't see RWS being satisfied by his team winning if it sucks as a business. I think the respect of employees is great for RWS and he has taken advantage of special opportunities like inviting Flutie to his parties (he does not invite players to his home generally I understand). However, though he wants TD and the crew to respect their Daddy, he gas learned from Butler and Wade sometimes you have to fire family, so i think this only goes so far. I think he likes the respect of the community but this is built by him in giving away tickets to the Boys and Girls Clubs and charities and satisfying our psychpotic love for the Bills seems like good business practice to him and a nice side effect if it happens but not a leader for him in decision-making. I think W/Ls are my almost single priority as a fan but my sense is his priorities are very different and far more complex than mine.

I'm not a member of a union and my one experience with them saw them really fail to represent the workers they were trying to organize so my personal experience with unions is non-existent and bad in my episode. However, though they are bad, the alternative they work to balance of corporate manaqement seems worse to me in many cases, GM and Ford are excellent examples. As horrendous as the UAW seems to be in many cases, the corporate management of these two companies seems demonstrably worse to me. Ford and GM management had a dominant position in the market through the sixties which certainly could have allowed them to even try to pursue a seemingly intelligent money making strategy of making the best cars. It was not the unions which stopped them from doing this as the Japanese with the "burdens" of the lifetime employment that all workers get there and their socialized medical system built better cars. The Europeans operated with a social welfare state which taxed corporations at a much higher rate than America but still produced cars like Volvo that emphasized safety or the Volkswagen bug which catered to the lower end of the market. GM and Ford managers simply built bad cars and though they began to get their act together as imports swept past them. They unfortunately did not keep up the push to simply develop better cars and instead focused their time and powerful marketing to pushing SUVs and muscle cars. Now that reality had changed once again and gas prices have shot up, GM finds itself near bankrunptcy and Ford is struggling to enter a hybrid marketplace which they had left to Toyota and Honda and the Japanese now dominate. Unions are certainly bad, but the corporate leaders are worse. The American way is one which instead is dedicated toward the individual. This allowed folks to make their own bed and sleep in it without the guarantee of lifetime jobs of Japan or the social welfare of Europe. However, within this freedom corporate leaders can be stupid and unions can come together to battle with tese corporate idiots even if they are stupid also. It isn't fair but hey life is not fair.

I'm not sure that one can even call McKinnie "adequate" at this point. 1. Like it or not McKinnie is a key part of an inadequate O. They have won 3 in a row and did roll up some nice yardage on the Pack in the second half. However, before anyone decides this is some declaration of adequacy, remember that this was the Packers, who have one of the worse records in the NFL and their weak defense is a big part of this. The Vikes have a good thing going as there is little film on Johnson running this O. His quick release is helpful to the advantages and failings of McKinnie. However reaching the minimum of point scoring adequacy in a game (holding an O below 20 points in considered good play by the D). Given that 7 of MN points cameion an INT return, and it was the lowly Pack there is no way to call the Vike O production with McKinnie adequate. 2. McKinnie still has as a part of his play and career his rookie holdout and his arrest earlier this year. I don't think one can reasonably dub BM adequate until he plays well enough to ignore these negatives. merely being OK) which i do not think he has achieved yet) does not make him an adequate LT. 3. The big rap on MW for the Bills is not simply his play but that we are paying for and he has a cap hit of a #4 choice. McKinnie suffers from the same indictment being correct for him at a lower slot. He is a drag on this team because he is not worth his cap hit and if the Vikes want adequate play they could buy two or more players for what BM brings in for the less than adequate play he has provided for his career overall and even in many judgments in his best "game" if you want to call a half of MNF football that.

I know its popular in this society to attack the individual who questions a move rather than having one's first reaction be to attack his ideas (ex. the Bush Admin first attacked Murtha as being like Michael Moore and then some idiot Congresswoman called him a coward when he is a proven Marine, but fortunately now seem to realize that even mainstream Dems like Joe Biden disagree with his ideas so they are focusing on them). The key to buftex's ideas is not whether he is in fact something you cannot know, but in the ideas in themselves. If you think he is an idior please say so and say why. The meaningless attacks do no one any good.

My sense is that the NFL and the NFLPA agreed to arbitration as a mechanism for keeping the overall peace which allows the CBA to exist as a viable document when they cannot agree. Both sides (I assume that the NFL also has the right to do in an arbitrator after a decision just as the players do) should have the right to not have an arbitrator for future disputes whom they (rightly or wrongly) or a significant part of their group has no confidence in. Bloch has demonstrated that if he thinks either side is totally wrong he will find accordingly. As NFLPA members have no confidence in him to split the baby and find a result mutually disatisfactory to both sides if he feels one side is wrong, they "fired" or elected not have him arbitrate these disputes. There are those who will look at the goal of Bloch's work as to make what he sees is the correct decision and they correctly will judge that the NFLPA has "fired" someone for making a correct decision. There are those who will look at the goal of Bloch's work is to find a mutually disatisfactory outcome to any dispute that allows both sides to save face even if the way he split the baby is wrong on the face of it. They will correctly judge Bloch as having failed in this task. I am one who sees the point that TO is wrong and the Eagles were right as important but not everything that is important here. I like this outcome where the important fact that the Eagles won this decision was upheld, but also that the NFLPA "fires" this arbitrator from future decisions so that TO and his supporters among the players can still support the CBA. I like this decision and I like the NFL and NFLPA keeping up their developing partnership with the CBA so I like this outcome. The irony of this is that the biggest NFL loss was when they beat the players and Ed Garvey like a drum around the replacement player dispute of the mid-80s. They beat the NFLPA they decided under the leadership of Gene Upshaw to dissolve as a negotiating agent for the players. The NFL found themselves faced with the result from this victory of potentially being forced to operate in a free market where they would negotiate and bid for individual players. The NFL desperately needed the NFLPA in order to restrain trade and not operate in a free market. As a result rather than operating under the Garvey proposal of 52% of gross revenue, the current CBA calls for the players to receive about 70% of the "defined" gross revenue. Significant revenue tracks such as luxury boxes are not part of this "defined" pool. However. given the partnership the collective now makes so much money from the networks (the big cash cow and part of the "defined" gross) that the players are making more money than ever. By winning the labor dispute of the strike, the NFL actually lost in the big picture as they had to give up a far larger percentage of the gross to the workers (aka the product). However, by losing this and having to foster more of a partnership wiith the players the NFL owners are now making far more money than ever. They have had to give up the absolute control over players which they had in the Halas days when players had to work as ditch diggers during the off-season. The owners have given up a lot of control over issues like morality clauses, beard lengths and other trivia. However, in the end money talks and the rest walks, The CBA and the developing partnership is the underpinning of this relationship,

Actually this was my mistake as what I meant was that the choice at the time was a B without the benefit of hindsight that he would not work out. What the pundits said at the time of the draft is as meaningless as what you or I said, but at the time the consensus was that if you were going to invest in getting your LT of the future MW snd BM were the choices and that MW was a more likely choice. Neither has proven to be an answer for a team at LT and neither is anywhere near worth the slotted cost of a #4.

I agree with you this isn't easy because the logical mind would want neither. However given the bad choice between MW who unprofessionally melted down and let his teammates and the region down when his Grammy died, or alternately, the player who missed much of his rookie season holding out and has had his off-field runs in with the law and both have sorely disappointed with their play on the field which has been inconsistent at best. I'd choose MW. Fortunately it is unlikely the Bills will have to deal with either player as a Bills roster candidate for the 2006 season.

I aggree 100% with the arbitrator that the Eagles were 100% right in giving Terrell the 4 game suspension allowed under the rules and then in simply sitting him but paying him for the remainder of the season. This stand was necessary to maintain some sense of pulling together as a team rather than allowing an individual to act on his behalf whether it keeps them a team or not. However, I also agree that it can be a very rational and good move on the NFLPA's part to exercise their right under the CBA to fire an arbitrator they choose to fire (as my guess the NFL also has a right to do under the CBA). Though this slam-dunk ruling appears to be right, the move by the NFLPA is probably a good move in order to maintain the unity of the players. The players as a group appear to be split on the TO situation. By canning this arbitrator they have no impact on the Eagles ruling, but those who disagree with it are thrown this bone. The players who do agree with the ruling (and thus McNabb) win out because TO is gone and probably could care less what happens to the arbitrator beyond wishing him well and god speed (I think this arbitrator will roundly be received as a hero to business and to most of American society. He will almost certainly gain a soft landing from this and should be better off financially and can even find some other role with the game (ESPN?) if he chooses. I agree with the finding and I agree with the canning and the outcomes look great to me.

Another post on TSW about Bryant McKinnie led to a series of comments about the 2002 draft and its impacts on the Bills. Given that the start of this good discussion stemmed from the dubious propostion that TD's mistake was taking MW rather than McKinnie (even the thought that McKinnie had a good game -or a good half for the inadequately performing MN offense which luckily was facing and even worse Packers team- caused a lot of debate and actually is simply silly as evidence that no matter how much MW sucks overlooking BM's holdout, to his record with the police and his some bad play on the field because of one half of good football against a bad team is just silly) it seemed useful to revisit the 2002 draft judging it: 1. Based on the quality of TD's choices at the time rather than 20/20 hindsight and, 2. A thought of how this draft interplays with TDs total record as a draft lader. Round Pick Overall Pos. Player College 1 4 4 OT Mike Williams Texas Overall- I think this is a failed pick headed toward being a bust. Ijudge him IMHO as 2002- Good rookie year in a productive offense. His QB took too many sacks, but proved to be productive as both Bledsoe and Moulds made the Pro Bowl while other WR PP got 94 catches. Meanwhile, MW and the OL blocked productively for Henry's 1400+ rushing performance that got him in as a Pro Bowl reserve as well. The sack failings can be linked somewhat to the rookie MW's failings but even moreso they seem to be the fault of an immobile QB, a predictable O which Gilbride refused to change and other OL issues that year which saw Ruben be the only player with any starts ever at his position. MW looked very good as a player on a productive O and its hard to rationally complain much about him having many problems as all rookies must adjust and few are a part of such a productiver O and a team which saw its record improve from 3-13 to 8-8. 2003- The overall OL production was much the same statistically as once again the lead runner had a good year rushing and the pass pro gave up too many sacks. However, these particular stats do not tell the story of the ultimate stat of this team finishing 6-10 with poor production by the O as a major factor in this downturn. MW's game in particular suffered as the tale was told too often by him and RG Mike Pacillo staring at each other over the sacked body of Drew Bledsoe with body language which screamed "I thought you had him" as these two failed to cooridinate on stunts and joined the rest of the OL in being bad. Was the reason for this something inherent in MW which should have been assessed in him by TD and the Bills? Hard to say and really who knows. However, given that he had a very good year the year before and he issue is he failed to continue his progress from college to the pro ball there are other factors which at least are relevant: A. His coaching was piss poor as GW is not an O guy, Kevin Killdrive refused to change from his way despite the league getting tons of tape on the Bills and BB and NE providing a roadmap on how to undress the Bills O, and also OL coach Vinky having only had one year at the position. B. He needed more schooling and help from his vet peers, yet he ended up being responsible for teaching the not ready for primetime Pacillo at RG. 2004- The problems this year were all on MW as he reacted unprofessionally to death of the Grandmother who raised him and missed all of the minicamps and then showed up to training camp overweight and out of shape. Being hit hard by your Grammy who raised you dying is certainly understandable, but it is not condonable for someone in his business as well paid as he is. Fortunately, with good support and great training by JMac (good use of the stick in threatening to move him inside and the carrot of giving him a gameball when he played well last season) he did get it together and had what some have called his best year as a Bill and give him credit for being the best OL player on the team (though whether being the best Bill OL player is saying much is another question. Still the damage was done. With his #4 slot, MW carried the cap hit of a player who should have a least been the LT and should have been the recognized leader on the team. Things were set-up for this given the Bills correctly let JJ go rather than pay him LT bucks. However his lost year delayed him moving until 2006 after he proved himself this year. 2005- He simply has not proved himself to be a starting LT or even a consistent OL player this year. This may be due to injury, this may be due to the bad breaks of poor training and Grammy dying, this may be because he is simply a wennie as a player. It does not matter why. The fact is that he cannot take down the 2006 salary he is slated to make and be an inconsistent OL player. Real world grade- D (headed toward F when he gets cut). TD's grade in hindsight- B Like it or not he was judged as a great pick (a shoo in as an NFL talent according to Buschbaum) by tons of pundits (Kiper, Great North, PFW, Buschnaum, etc.). One can fault him for not trading down in hindsight and getting Levi Jones (a #10 pick by the Bengals who has done well at LT), but the Jones pick was lambasted by many at the time as a reach. Demanding that TD see this is such 20/20 hindsight as to be even beyond my silliness is wishing that reality were different. One might also argue that a player like a Henderson who was valued around #4 and who has done well was a better pick. However, this argument gets reduced to 20/20 hindsight because OL was such a neglected position under Butler and givebn the investment in Bledsoe was such a crying need that picking anyone but MW or McKinnie is just silly to insist on at this point. Finally there is the argument that we should have taken McKinnie rather than MW. It seems to be the case we would be in about the same shape with this position, but would have had to go through the trauma and idiocy of his holdout and criminal tendencies in exchange for the slight hope he might have given because his holdout and criminality leave some hope he can actually become a player one day. Thus is getting too long a post even for me. I actually found some free time to do this cause my college buddy who is joining us for Thanksgiving needed some sleep after driving here but I here some stirring so I'm off to be a host and I will get back to this list later. 2 4 36 WR Jake Reed LSU 2 29 61 DE Ryan Denney BYU 3 32 97* SS Coy Wire Stanford 5 4 139 DT Justin Bannan Colorado 6 4 176 CB Kevin Thomas UNLV 7 4 215 OG Mike Pucillo Auburn 7 40 249* WR Rodney Wright Fresno St. 7 42 251* FB Jarett Ferguson Virginia Tech 7 50 260# LB Dominique Stevenson Tennessee

TD has tried to follow the Cowher model with his HC hires of GW and MM in that Copwher when hired was NOT an experienced coach as you say but was actually a first time HC. TD missed completely in hiring GW who it turned out was not ready for primetime and as antsy as we fans tend to be the jury is still out on MM. It does not look good in assessing him since he is merely a .500 coach when we expect, demand and deserve better.