Orton's Arm

Does it bother you that your contribution to this thread has been precisely zero? I'm just curious.

The problem is, a lot of the money TD's been making has been based on preseason hype followed by disappointing regular seasons. Eventually he'll drink that well dry.

I used to like Nickelback, but now all their songs are starting to sound the same.

I sincerely hope you're not actually trying to stick up for CTM. Meazza isn't the only one who has found him and his posts an obstruction to an intelligent, reasonable discussion.

Dude, you are the one who said how smart GG is. This is a point YOU are trying to prove, so YOU need to do the work to prove it. Or do you need someone to hold your hand?

This is the second time on this thread someone's complimented GG's intelligence. Certainly he has provided us with no evidence of intelligent thought on this thread. I'm curious as to which threads he's posted on where his thoughts and arguments are well reasoned and well thought out.

Edwards was playing poorly before he got hurt. TD had to know age would catch up to Adams sooner or later. Last year's defense was good, but not as good as its #2 yardage rating would seem to indicate. I remember the game-deciding nine minute drive allowed to the Steelers, the last minute comebacks allowed to the Jets and the Jaguars, and the poor performances with respect to the Patriots. The defense's pretty stats came because the Bills faced a lot of lousy offenses last year, and the style of defense was best suited to making an already bad offense look absolutely terrible. As for this year, it was clear the defense was deeply flawed even before we lost Spikes. Cadillac Williams was running through the defense like a hot knife through butter even before Spikes left the field on a cart. Gandy was clearly a step down from a healthy Jennings, so I wish TD had addressed that position relatively early in the draft. Ever since TD got here, one of the Bills' OG spots has always been the source of flux and uncertainty, with no one player able to establish himself as the bona fide starter over the long term. TD had to know Anderson wasn't going to put an end to this situation. Typically, it's hard for rookie WRs and TEs to come in and contribute right away anyway. They say a WR doesn't really hit his stride until his third year. Besides that, Josh Reed's surprisingly good showing early in the year meant that the #3 receiver position wasn't a problem anyway--at least not early on. Everett is more of a pass-catching TE than a blocker, but problems with the offensive line have forced the coaches to keep the TE in to block. No GM has a perfect draft record, and many first round picks fail. The problem with TD is his failure to adequately deal with the three core areas: QB, offensive line, defensive line. He gets an incomplete at QB, an F for the offensive line, and a C-/D+ for the defensive line.

Yes, the kind of repetitive jeering you describe gets very boring very fast. There are a lot of Alaska Darrin wannabes on these boards. The difference between Alaska and the wannabes is that the former is usually clever and original when putting someone down. Besides all that, the speed of light can be greatly affected by the medium it's passed through: http://news.com.com/Slowing+the+speed+of+l..._3-5387842.html If these people are going to razz you about this whole light/sound thing, they at least need to get their facts straight. They should be saying that the speed of light in a vacuum is greater than the speed of sound. The speed of light in a vacuum > the speed of light when traveling through the Earth's air > the speed of light when traveling through water > the speed which soundwaves travel through the Earth's air > the speed that light was traveling at for a few microseconds in some of those experiments!

I don't remember him saying that light and sound travel at the same speed.

Not everything you fail to comprehend automatically lacks sense. Better to have tried and failed, than not to have tried at all. Pot? Kettle? Black?

This time you've presented your case far more persuasively. I'm not saying you've got me convinced, however. If anything, the veterans on that team wanted Holcomb to keep playing. Thinking about the Moulds comments, he was in a win now mode. Other veterans were saying the same things, though maybe not as loudly as Moulds. I believe that after week 4, the players would have welcomed any pro-Holcomb interference by TD or Wilson.

These are strange words from a guy who insults my reading comprehension. Try finding the words "Roy Williams" in any of my initial posts. Blah blah blah. Some draft picks work as planned. Others don't. You've made this point before, I've agreed with it, and once again there's no apparent reason for you to be bringing it up. You're focusing in on one well-intentioned but failed pick. I'm looking at the big picture. Yeah, because as we all know, it's impossible to trade up in the draft when the Bills have a low first rounder, and it's impossible to trade down when the Bills pick early in the round. Are you trying to say the Bledsoe trade was a stroke of brilliance? Or are you trying to say that because TD had done something good with the Peerless deal, he needed to even things out by wasting a first round pick? And what about the fact TD squandered the opportunity to franchise and trade away Antoine Winfield? This is beyond ridiculous. Had I said the Clements trade-down was a bad idea, you'd be calling me a mindless TD basher. And rightly so. I'm saying that some TD decisions were good, others bad. In case you haven't happened to notice the Bills' win/lost record, the bad decisions outweigh the good. Is it your intention to convince me you're one of the least intelligent posters on these boards? You're certainly going about it the right way. My point was simple, and shouldn't have been this hard for you to grasp. I'll spell it out nice and clear for you: 1. The Bills' offensive line represents 23% of the starters, yet under TD has received just 13% of the first-day picks. 2. The offensive line hasn't received a first-day pick in the last three drafts. 3. The offensive line is this team's biggest area of need, and is being neglected. You feebly attempted to refute these points by pointing out that many first-day offensive line picks are busts. How on earth does that fact make it okay for TD to ignore the offensive line on the draft's first day? I'm trying to understand whether there is a remotely sane chain of reasoning here. The first day of the draft provides busts at every position. Even that kicker Oakland took in the first round hasn't lived up to expectations. You seem to want TD to say the following to his staff: "The first day of the draft is fraught with risk and uncertainty. No matter what position a player may play, there's a good chance he'll turn out to be a bust. We should respond to this risk by never again drafting an offensive lineman on the draft's first day, even though that's our biggest area of need."

I think the players are reasonable enough to understand what happened here. Management thought Losman was ready, so they started him. It turns out he wasn't, so they benched him. While he was benched, he got better in practice. That carried over to the game when the time came to put him back in there. Why would any player feel mutiny to be the proper response to this situation?

I agree with you 100%.

Why does everyone always think I'm someone else? This week it's Tortured Soul. Last week it was . . . someone or another, I don't remember. Next week it will be someone else.

You are of course welcome to your own opinion. I've seen nothing on this thread which would convince me to share it.

Yeah, I'm sure you've never used the argumentum ad hominum technique on anyone else. Inferior? Considering that I complimented the post, you should be at least dimly aware that I might have already read it. It's not clear where you're going with this. No matter what round you choose a player in, or what position he plays, there's a strong chance he will be a bust. That probability increases during the later rounds of the draft.

This is relevant . . . how? Did I say everything TD did was dumb? No. On occassion, TD does something good, like the 2001 draft. Unfortunately, he followed it up with the disaster that was the 2002 draft, and then the Bledsoe trade. Bill Walsh once said that Steve DeBerg is good enough to get you beat. The same could be said about TD.

Interesting how anyone who disagrees with your ill-founded views is somehow guilty of crying in his soup. Thanks for reinforcing my point: you're supposed to build an offensive line through the draft, not through free agency.

I don't even remember the guy's name. He's no longer with the team, having been beaten out by Ross Tucker. Well, either TD expected Jennings to be a constant injury case, or he didn't. If this was the expectation, Jennings shouldn't have been drafted in the first place. If TD didn't think Jennings would constantly be hurt, TD shouldn't have let him go four and out. The Bills have exactly two Day 1 picks in TD's tenure. There have been none since 2002, which is what I was getting at earlier. I didn't look at what those teams did in 2005. Also, the guys chosen in 2001 that I mentioned are still with their teams; unlike TD's 2001 OL pick. The other guys I mentioned weren't busts, unlike Mike Williams. Also, some of these teams have good offensive linemen obtained before 2001. Buffalo isn't in that situation, so TD should have been using extra first-day picks to catch up.

You bring up an excellent point. Me saying thank you to someone for an excellent post proves beyond a doubt that I'm a whiny crybaby. This particular piece of insight is the crown jewel of the fine logic and insight you've been displaying throughout this thread. You're welcome. But New England picked at #13 that year, using the pick we traded them for Drew Bledsoe.

Just last year he attempted to fill the starting left OG spot with a guy who couldn't make Baltimore's final roster. Expectations for the guys TD has brought in have generally been low; and their actual performances even worse. Let's look at this a little more closely. Villarrial I'll accept. But Gandy only came here to replace the more expensive Jennings. I'm not saying TD should have matched San Francisco's outlandish offer to Jennings. Instead, TD should have solved the problem in advance by signing Jennings to a longer-term deal. Campbell is a TE, and Price was signed for depth. That's because under the collective bargaining agreement, a veteran has to be paid more than what a lower round draft pick is typically going to make. Your lower round draft picks--assuming they make the team--are going to save you money on the salary cap somewhere or another. At the time MW was drafted, I liked the fact that a commitment was being shown to building the offensive line. Too bad there haven't been any additional first day OL picks under TD. As for showing favoritism: you show favoritism to a unit when you sign a free agent like Takeo Spikes or even London Fletcher. There's no way any of TD's OL FA signings even come close to Takeo's level, and other than Villarrial they don't come close to Fletcher's level either.

An excellent post. Thanks for doing this work.

Well, I'll just have to give you some more names then, won't I? How about Matt Light, the LT the Patriots drafted in the second round of 2001 (48th overall). Or Nick Hardwick, whom the Chargers chose with their 3rd round pick in 2004 (66th overall) and who is now starting at center. There's George Foster, drafted in the first round of 2003 by Denver (20th overall) who is now the Broncos' starting RT. The Bengals obtained the left side of their excellent o-line via first day picks from 2001 - 2004. Steinbach, the LG, was taken in the second round of 2003 (33rd overall), and LT Levi Jones was taken in the first round of 2002 (10th overall). The Seahawks are another team that's finding success due in part to an excellent offensive line. Their LG Steve Hutchinson came in 2001's first round (17th overall). Their starting RT, Sean Locklear, came in the 3rd round of the 2004 draft (84th overall). Pittsburgh is another team with a very strong offensive line; the right side of which was drafted on the first day, between 2001 - 2004. Kendall Simmons, right OG, came in the first round of the 2002 draft (30th overall). Max Starks, the starting RT, came in the 3rd round of the 2004 draft (75th overall). The Bills chose Tim Anderson one pick earlier. All this is just from looking at just a few teams with successful offensive lines, and only at what they've done with their first-day picks from 2001 - 2004.

Yes, they're overpaying for him. But if he can stay healthy, there will be years of continuity at that position.