Orton's Arm

I'm not sure how much credibility we had after going 5-11 in year 5 of TD's tenure. No offensive line, not much defensive line, uncertainty at the QB position, aging veterans at many other positions. Credibility? Hah!

I was in favor of going for it and putting the game away. The Trojans' punting game wasn't going to give them much extra field position, and their defense had been dominated all game. Instead of relying on your weaker units to win the game for you, you have to rely on whichever unit is strongest. And that was clearly the Trojans' offense.

Some tasks can't be delegated, and building a big-picture cap strategy is one of those tasks. I don't expect Marv to worry about every last $100,000 escalator clause, but I do expect him to be able to say to the cap/contract guy, "Player X is a big part of the future I envision for this team, while Player Y is a guy we can walk away from if he gets too greedy. We won't be good in 2006 no matter what we do, so don't mortage the future just yet. Having said that, I really don't want Player Z to hit free agency, so see if you can get him signed to a long-term deal. But don't overpay for him."

Actually, daninator makes a good point. The salary cap isn't dirty work, it's big picture thinking. You need to have an awareness of whether your team is good enough that you should mortgage the future for the present by getting into cap jail. You need to know what a given player could get if he were to hit free agency, and to compare that against the dollar value of what his play would bring to your team. You also have to weigh in the value of continuity, such as the chemistry between a QB and a WR, or having offensive linemen that have worked together for a number of years. You delegate the detail work to some guy with glasses, but ultimately the GM needs to be the one to do the big picture cap management.

As has been pointed out, there is no great mystery to the salary cap. If you give a guy a signing bonus, that gets amortized over the life of the contract. Simple math. The mystery comes in when deciding what a player's worth would be in free agency. Butler clearly messed this up by giving Fina a big contract. The next year, Fina was released, and played for someone else at close to the minimum salary. So you don't want to overestimate what someone else will pay for your players, as Butler did. But you don't want to underestimate it either. TD's best OL draft choice was Jonas Jennings. But Jennings walked after just four years because TD let him hit free agency instead of signing him to an extension after year 2 or 3. When your GM makes this kind of mistake too often, your cap situation will be good, but your team won't be. The key to managing your cap well is knowing which players you want to keep, and offering them just enough money to keep them from hitting free agency.

Hey, since when did you become this eloquent? I really don't know what's going to happen here. Let's see . . . The Glass is Half Empty - Marv has no experience as a GM, assistant GM, scout, or any other related position - Marv talks about finding character players, while admitting to lying in an interview (he said he was 58 when he was 61) - As a coach, Marv didn't always surround himself with a talented coaching staff. His only real offensive coordinator was Ted Marchibroda, his only defensive coordinator was Wade Philips. Now he has the final say in building the management/football side of the organization. - Marv is 80 years old. He may not have the mental flexibility he once did, and he might not have the same energy level. The Glass is Half Full - Marv has been around football for a very long time. Presumably he's gotten a feel for what makes a player successful. - Tom Modrak did a pretty good (but not great) job in Philly, and he can hold the fort while Marv gets up to speed. - Marv said he would bring an emphasis on character. That is certainly something this team needs. - It looks like the offensive and defensive coordinators will be replaced. Hopefully this will solve most of the team's coaching problems.

IIRC, all Leinart said was that his was the better team despite the loss. I don't see having confidence in yourself or your team as a character flaw.

I agree that Young, Bush, etc. are not worthy of top 5 picks. But a loss to Cincy still would have helped. Lose the game, get the #3 overall pick, then TRADE DOWN.

Oh really? Look at the 2005 Bills roster. Nobody on that offensive line deserves to be a starter, including Jason Peters. Nobody on the defensive line deserves to be a starter, except maybe Aaron Schobel. With TD going one for nine in the trenches (where the game is won or lost), you can't expect much.

There was more than just TD being fired: - Tom Modrak isn't a candidate for GM - Protest signs shouldn't have been removed from the stadium - Levy will be involved in setting a new direction for this franchise

Great post.

That 25% chance is good enough. Compare what Jim Kelly did for this franchise to what first round CBs have done for it. Antoine Winfield was here for four years, Nate Clements looks like he'll be here for five, Thomas Smith was a first rounder who was here for four or five years. Imagine another first round CB who's like those guys: meets expectations, stays for 4 - 5 years, then he leaves. On one side of the equation, you have the 13 years of good quarterback play Jim Kelly gave this franchise. On the other side, you have the 16 - 20 years of good cornerback play those four first round CBs collectively gave to the franchise. Which is better? While the years of good CB play are useful, clearly Jim Kelly brings much more to the table. So a 25% chance of getting a very good QB is better than a 100% chance of getting the next Nate Clements. So you go through a little bit of a drought while you're going through the bad first round QBs to get to the good one. But once you find the guy you're looking for, you can make higher percentage draft picks at other positions, put a team together, and go for a Super Bowl run.

You may have hit on the difference between Holcomb and Bledsoe. Early in Bledsoe's Dallas career, TD said something to the effect of, "wait 'till he faces those defenses a second time around." It was something that shouldn't have been said, even though there was a lot of truth to it. Bledsoe gets worse the more often he sees a particular defense. Holcomb, it would seem, gets better. And Marvin Lewis knows a thing or two about coaching defense, so if Holcomb can win that chess match, that's saying something.

Yeah, but check out who Holcomb's supporters have been. London Fletcher. Chris Villareal. Eric Moulds. Vilarreal has been having a lousy year, but his problems are due to old age and injury rather than a lack of mental toughness. As for London Fletcher, he's one of the toughest guys on the team.

Yeah, a LOT of Patriots fans have pro-Holcomb sigs.

Look at production. When Holcomb has played from start to finish, the Bills have never scored fewer than 16 points. In 2005, Patriots have twice been held to 16 points, and twice been held to 17. Holcomb's passer rating for the year--92.9--is similar to Brady's of 93.0. With Holcomb under center, the Bills have averaged 22.3 points per game. With Brady under center, the 2005 Patriots have averaged 23.5 points per game. And it's not like Holcomb is surrounded by worlds of offensive talent. There is no offensive line, the running game is often absent, and the playcalling is sometimes questionable. Despite these and other problems, the Bills produce points at a Patriots-like level when Holcomb is taking the snaps. I fail to see the problem with having Holcomb under center.

An excellent post. In 2003 (when Holcomb was a starter in Cleveland), his QB rating was a Bledsoe-like 74.6. Not terrible, but certainly below average. But prior to that year, he'd had only three starts. If Losman is allowed to look bad due to lack of experience, why not Holcomb? Since then, Holcomb has improved. His QB ratings for 2004 and 2005 are 96.8 and 92.9. Those aren't the ratings of a journeyman. But many people see a journeyman anyway, because that's what they expect to see.

Dallas's offensive line is a LOT better than ours. So if Bledsoe is taking a few more sacks anyway, it's a sign that he doesn't get rid of the ball as quickly as, say, Holcomb. I agree that Holcomb is better than Bledsoe if you don't plan on having an offensive line or a running game. But short passes--death by a thousand small cuts--is a good offensive style even when you do have an OL. Look at what the New England offense is able to do with its death by a thousand small cuts style of play. Look what the Giants were able to do to us in our first Super Bowl using that style of offense. A viable plan for the Bills would be to focus on the lines, put Holcomb under center, replace the coordinators, and see what happens.

I'm less than pleased with the direction this thread has taken. In Oakland, the offense put up 17 points despite no running game and absolutely no offensive line whatsoever. Doesn't that say something positive about the passing game? As for checkdowns, it's hard for me to believe that you can put up 300 yards on the Bengals simply by throwing for 5 yards on 3rd and 10. Holcomb has the support of his teammates, and that says a lot to me. Maybe guys who play football for a living, and who get to see Holcomb in practice every day, know a little more about him than posters on these boards.

Flutie played well until he was 37, while Holcomb is just 33. So maybe Mularkey is curious about what Holcomb can offer the Bills for the next several years.

Sometimes a top-tier pick can be a Hall of Fame player that will help you for ten years. Bruce Smith, Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, and Eli Manning were all first overall picks. Now, you say that a win helps build confidence for next year. But confidence for whom? If players like Bennie Anderson, Teague, or Gandy feel an increase in confidence, who cares? Those guys shouldn't be here next year anyway. In fact, a LOT of the Bills' current players need to go.

Chicago's defense has benefitted from facing very few teams with actual offenses. Personally, I think the Bears' defense is overrated, and it wouldn't surprise me if some other NFC team took the championship. Maybe someone from the NFC South.

Let's say you guys are right, and a #10 overall pick is better than 5th overall because of salary etc. Well, you're still better off with #5 overall, so you can TRADE DOWN, get the #10 overall pick, not to mention some other picks too. Of course, sometimes glamour picks prove to be worth it. Just ask Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, and Carson Palmer; all of whom were 1st overall picks.

I'm going to agree with Buftex on this one. Favre is on a lousy team, and he feels the need to win. That makes him desperate, and desperate men take unwise gambles.

With the way Holcomb played against the Bengals, he could be our QB of the present. Having said that, the Bills would be better off losing the Jets game to get draft picks. So from the perspective of wanting the worse QB to start, you could make a case for Losman.