Orton's Arm

You're not my teacher.

There is also a learning curve for free agents to learn your blocking system and develop chemistry with each other. Stability is an important part of building a line. That's why the draft is so important. You're supposed to draft successful players, and have them spend their entire careers with your organization. If you bring in a free agent, one of two things will happen: 1) either he will be good/expensive enough that you'll need to start him right away, despite the chemistry thing, or 2) he'll be bad/cheap enough to let him sit for a year and learn your scheme, in which case he won't have much of an impact. Unless you are fortunate enough to sign a free agent early in his career--as San Francisco was when they signed Jennings--you'll be stuck with a guy who can give you a few good years, after which you'll have to start the whole chemistry thing all over again. This is one of the reasons why good lines are seldom if ever built via free agency.

Over the last five years, other teams have had the same opportunities to build their offensive lines that TD has had. The bottom line is that as of right now, Buffalo's offensive line is the second-worst in the league. Whether other teams found offensive linemen via high draft picks like Levi Jones, or second day picks, or undrafted free agents, doesn't concern me. If TD wants to neglect the offensive line on the first day of the draft, he needs to make up for it with success on the second day, or in free agency. He's done neither.

You are right. Since I was part of the reason the discussion got off track, I may as well do my share to set things right. If you're looking for bang for the buck, Terrence McGee is the best pick, because he's the only bona fide starter among TD's second day draft picks. A lot of the players are young skill position guys on offense. Poor offensive line play makes them harder to evaluate. Take Lee Evans. His numbers are down this year, but maybe it's because the offensive line just can't get him the time he needs to get open deep. But based on last year, you could make a case for McGahee or Evans or Clements as being the best draft picks overall.

That's baloney. In his tenure here, TD has neglected the offensive line on the first day of the draft. You're saying he's made up for it via free agent signings. But just as the round a player was selected in shows the level of commitment for draft picks, so too player salaries show the level of commitment for free agent signings. TD's o-line free agent signings have ranged from average to cheap, because nobody else was dumb enough to want most of those guys. He has? Other than Villarrial, who are these proven and reliable free agents? Teague, a guy Denver didn't want? Castoffs like Gandy and Anderson? C'mon man. Of the 22 projected starters for this year, 9 came via TD's drafts. In other words, TD has tried to compensate for his draft-day failures by buying a team through free agency. Problem is, a team built in this way will get old very fast. Ours has.

Your post was well-written, and I respect that. At the same time, I'll take issue with some of the points you raised. TD has had five drafts with the Bills, meaning he's had 15 first-day picks. He's used 13% of those picks (2 out of 15) on offensive linemen. Yet 23% of your starters are offensive linemen (5 out of 22). In other words, the offensive line is getting only about half its fair share of first day draft picks. The offensive line is in shambles, and TD's lack of commitment to building it is a big reason why. The other year, Ralph Wilson was asked what the team's biggest area of need was. He said (not an exact quote), "The offensive line--both lines, really." From that point forward, the offensive line should have gotten more than its fair share of first day picks, both because of its importance, and because it was a position of need. Yet since 2002, the offensive line hasn't gotten any first-day picks. As a fan, I find this difficult to understand.

Ultimately, TD had a job to do: fix the offensive line. He was given tools to do the job: time, draft picks, the ability to sign free agents, the ability to choose a coaching staff. He hasn't gotten the job done, as is plainly obvious from the line's putrid level of play. If fans look to see where TD went wrong, it's because it's obvious he messed up.

If you look at TD's comments leading up to the draft, he said he'd received interest from other teams wanting to trade up. He also said that he's basically fallen in love with Mike Williams, and that it would take an extremely generous offer for him to trade down.

Um, dude, you might want to, you know, look at the post immediately above yours!

My point wasn't that the Bills should have taken Jammer, it was that they should have traded the #4 overall pick to someone else who wanted him.

You are dead-on right. I'm spending too much time being upset with this pick. I haven't gotten a decent night's sleep in the last three years thanks to dwelling on this particular TD mistake. Maybe now with your advice that will all change.

The same media reports that said Jammer "slipped" to #5 overall?

" [in the 2002 draft], the easy second-guess is the Bills should have traded down. But after Harrington went No. 3, nobody was looking to move up. " http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20051...?tbd1066559.asp In fact, a lot of teams would have liked to move ahead of San Diego's 5th overall pick to take Quentin Jammer.

At the start of the year, the only player penciled in as a starter who was selected on the second day of the draft or later was McGee. If scouting departments have grown in sophistication as much as some people say, then first-day picks should be working out better now than they used to be. Look at the starters on this team that were selected with draft picks or undrafted free agents. As usual, the offensive line is in flux, so I'll give TD credit for 1.5 starters out of 5. For offensive skill positions, he gets credit for Losman, McGahee, and Evans. So that's 4.5 offensive starters out of 11. On defense, 3/4 starters on the line are draft picks. Not that said picks are anything special. At LB, none of the starters are draft picks or UDFAs. In the secondary, 2/4 starters are draft picks. So that's 5 of 11 defensive starters. Of the 9.5 starters TD found by UDFA or the draft, many aren't that good. There's really nobody at DT, Mike Williams looks like he'll be gone at the end of the year, Jason Peters hasn't proven to be anything special, and Losman's future is still unknown. I'm not sure any of TD's draft picks have turned out to be elite players. Not with McGahee's recent struggles, Clements' mistakes in San Diego and other games, and Evans' dropoff in performance this year.

Ann from Gowanda is my favorite of the bunch. She looks classy.

Bargain basement free agents that no one else was dumb enough to want. Yes, after having drafted two offensive skill position players. To make up for the decent LG he let go Considering he was the 4th overall pick in the 2002 draft, it was about time he did something. Actually, he should have seen all of that coming. When it comes to signing free agents that have been in the league a few years, you usually get what you pay for. TD paid little for the LT and LG, and got even less. The RG is getting old, so injuries and declining play shouldn't exactly come as a shock. The RT has done little his whole career except the second half of last season, so it's not exactly a shock to see him doing little once again. The new C is a rookie, so of course he won't be seeing much playing time this year.

It's pretty sad that the 2005 Bills are on that list, especially because Holcomb in his four starts was known for going for the dump-off and getting rid of the ball quickly. Imagine how much worse the 2005 number would have been had Rob Johnson taken those four starts! I guess what I'm trying to do is point out the obvious: this offensive line can't even pronounce the words "pass protect."

I've read that Henry is only recently emerging from the Titans' doghouse, while Peerless is filling in for an injured #3 receiver the Cowboys are looking forward to having back.

I'd like to get back to the original point of this thread. Not that these boards didn't need a shouting match between AKC and Hollywood. Fortunately, this is the only thread on which such a shouting match has occurred. Yards after the catch is a tough one. Some QBs, such as Joe Montana, throw the ball with such precision that the receiver doesn't have to break stride to make the catch. This sets receivers up perfectly to make good yards after the catch. Any formula which takes away YAC would simply ignore one of the best and most unique aspects of Montana and others who had that perfect timing. I agree a QB shouldn't get credit for passes completed behind the line of scrimmage. I'd also throw this in there: under the present rating system, there is no effect for taking a sack, but your rating gets penalized if you throw the ball away. I'd say that if you're going to blame sacks on the offensive linemen--or receivers for not getting open--you should blame throwing the ball away on those people too. Don't reward the QB for taking the sack. But the biggest change I'd suggest is this: when a pass is thrown, ask first if it was catchable. If it was, treat it as a catch, regardless of the outcome of the play--catch, incompletion, interception, whatever. No sense in penalizing a QB just because his receivers have butter fingers. I'd say the current system should have less emphasis on completion percentage, and more emphasis on yards per pass attempt. If you complete a 45 yard pass to Lee Evans, chances are you're walking away from the drive with at least three points. I'd rather have a QB go 1-3--with one of the passes being a 45 yarder to Evans--than 3-3 with each pass being 3 yards long. Finally, the current system should take into account down and distance, at least on 3rd and 4th down. A 3rd or 4th down completion short of the first down marker should be treated like an incompletion. Whatever field position the QB gained means little next to the fact he didn't convert.

Yes they should. You play this game for the glory of proving you're the best. That's why everyone wants the Lombardi Trophy. That's also why the Colts should be gunning for 19-0.

I voted for Polian, the guy who chose Manning over Ryan Leaf. Polian's also the one who built that offensive line, successfully filled those offensive skill positions, put in some good players on defense, and built a great coaching staff. Take away Manning and put in an average QB like Mark Brunell, and Indy would still have a pretty good team. Take away Polian and put in a lousy GM, and you'd have, um, the 2005 Bills.

Ralph Wilson had a plan: hire TD, and let him build Buffalo into a football powerhouse. It didn't work. It's time to pick up the pieces, make some rational decisions regarding the general manager position, and see what happens next.

You don't want police blotter guys by any means. Lawrence Phillips had his share of off-field problems--such as dragging an ex-girlfriend down three flights of stairs. But those never translated into on-field production. I wouldn't look at guys who had major police blotter issues. I wouldn't be afraid to take guys who are a little more outspoken though, as long as they play with passion. Corey Dillon got labeled a character problem because of some of his comments, yet he's played well for New England.

Yeah, QBs from southern California who give off that surfer dude vibe have never had a problem fitting in with Buffalo culture!

I agree there's no way MW should be here next year at his present salary. I also agree he may lack the passion to be successful. But as long as he's on the roster anyway, why not give him a try at DT? It's not like the young players we have there now are--or will ever be--anything better than backup-quality at best. Nor is it like MW's offensive line contributions will be missed.