Pyrite Gal

Note to self: Don't get pregnant by Willis McGahee. Once this is accomplished, then the only other concern for me as a Bills fan will be if his stupidity as a father impacts his game on the field, otherwise I do not care. If I was a Vikes rooter, or the Bills had taken the route of drafting an idiot tackle of drafting Bryant McKinnie instead of bust Mike Williams, I'd be concerned about this story because as stupid as WM sounds, McKinnie seems to be an even worse version of this behavior. Again, this strikes me as a non-concern unless you let yourself get impregnated by WM/McKinnie or for some reason you invest in the soap opera of caring about these boys. However, the difference for me is if their stupid behavior impacts there play on the field, and party-leader McKinnie has shown a tendency to not only be an idiot but also to get caught by the law when he is an idiot (the charges against him on the Vikes party boat, his driving while intoxicated charge). As best as I can tell the irony here is that the Bills appear to be ahead in the choose MW or choose McKinnie decsion not only because of field effects like the McKinnie hold out that essentially cost him a season, but the Bills are done with non worthy top 10 choice MW while McKinnie is still taking up space and breating air in the uniform of the team which drafted him. McKinnie's play has improved since his holdout rookie year and with a vet QB who can get rid of the ball when necessary is quite a helpful thing for his game because he showed few signs of being able to maintain blocks long enough for a scrambler like Culppepper. However, this is yet another ingredient in what appears to be the recipe for disaster which came with high profile picks like MW and Harrington in that draft.

Even this indictment does not give full justice to just how not-ready for the NFL GW was (I he was hired by TD because TD was confident he could stop GW from ) running him out of town like Cowher did) and though these coachimg errprs were not the whole story of our OL problems since the early 90s it is a big part of it that must be mentioned to make any OL analysis rational. 1. Vinklarek was not only hired it seems mainly due to his being a lifelong friend of GW, but even worse he had never ever been an OL position coach before. 2. When even GW realized that Vinky was not cutting it he replaced him with Pat Ruel who had all of 1 year's experience as am OL coach at Detroit. This the crew working under the quickly fired Sheppard and good ol Kevin Killdrive that actually oversaw the selection and training of MW. If you want to blame the player fine, but this does not free Vinky of blame since he assessed him. While one could argue and I wouldn;t oppose the idea that MW was never gonna play well for anyone, this does not eradicate the fact that a player wheter great or bad is going to be worse with Vinky than with another coach.

There really are a fairly large number of legit reasons for a vet to miss these voluntary mini-camps. It's great when virtually the whole team shows up for them, but I would actually consider it a low-character act to show up for this voluntary but useful chance to hang out with the boys lf: 1. You passed up sitting doing nothing in the hospital or at bedside at home with a dying Mom or Dad or similar loved one. 2. You demonstrated Eric Moulds/WM like care and concern for your own child by missing out on some important formative event in your kids life to volunteer to hand out with the boys. 3. You reneged on an important commitment you gave your word to attend )for example a charity function where your presence was a major draw and this commitment was made before the voluntary camp wa scheduled. Its really good for the whole team to be there and it would strike me as low character if the vet missed this because he was simply off making bucks at some card show. However, since we do not know as this is a voluntary camp, then IMHO the benefit of the doubt goes to the player unless there is some history of bad acts. It would even strike me as a reasnable decision to make to skip this camp if all you were doing was staying at home with your wife becaise the deal is she does most of the work keeping the household and family together during the season so you can concentrate on your job, but in return you skip the voluntary camps and hang with her and the family.

No flaming from me regarding Butler as though I do not hold your opinion of what the cheapshot he made means regarding his overall character, it is mostly because he seems to have led a life filled with other actions that generally can go with (but are not proof-positive of) what a fan should consider to be high character acts (he has demontrably worked hard, achieved academi excellence, has done a number of unpaid educational activities and has participated in charity events for kids. He coo;d have done this things for machiavellian reasons, but a number of folks who are well known) UVA prof and governmental commentator Larry Sabato or )qould likely kill him if he stepped out of line) like the father of the girl/woman he dates have gone on record for his over-arching character. His low-character transgression was punished and he apologized so I for one and willing to trust but verify as a fan and simply will be less forgiving if he fouls up again and he owes no further explanantion IMHO even though he has inserted himself into the public sphere as an NFL player. However, I do differentiate between Butler as a person who I think does not deserve additional grief and who owes us no explanation from the corporation known as the Buffalo Bills. They are in the public sphere big time, and I think since they set the standard that they were going to get high character guys, the corporation owes its customers an explanation about how drafting a man suspended for a low-character act fits with their marketing promise. Though I think Butler owes no additional apology or explanation than the apology he already made accompanying his admission of screwing up and his suspension by UVA, I think the corporation known as the Buffalo Bills does owe its customers an exaplanation of its thinking and how this squares with their previous words. The good thing for the Bills is that I think they have a credible explanation for this much in line with what I said above. However, like many corporations I think they may well hide behind the punishment Butler got and deserved for the cheapshot and the sense he owes no explanation to pretend that the corporation owes no and actually would benefit from being proactive about this issue and explaining how this fit with their marketing promise to their customers. I think the Bills are foolish to confuse the forgiveness Butler deserves because he was punished, apologized and has no past history of idiocy like his cheapshot with the fact I think the Bills set the charcter standard for judging them. While you and I who are addicted to TSW may know the Butler bsckstory that indicates he deserves at least a trust but verify attitude, i think most fans who remember this or care about it will only see the videotape of the hit or remember it and connect it to Butler. I hope the Bills are smart enough not to try to hide behind Butler having apologized to not fess up to the fact that their promise of getting high character guys does not scan with the videotape of the cheapshot. The Bills do not need to explain for Butler's act, they need to explain for how their self-announced standard is met by a fuller study of the Butler story.

I think trying to boil this down to a definition is really hard to do. Having good character is such a broad complex things and understandable communicative writing is such a boiled down thing, that it is very hard to embody the true meaning of character in one phrase. We have to boil it down if we want to communicate effectively (otherwise every sentence would be as long and covoluted as one of my rambling posts). However, when we do attempt to boil this down and define it, front and center needs to be an acknowledgment or a reflection that the definer understands his definition will be incomplete, fall short or quite easily depicted as wrong or contradictory. For example, I think I know what you mean when you say keeping your mouth shut is a part of good character, but it seems quite clear to me that vocally standing up to injustice and unfairness is required for someone of good character. It in fact can be helpful to building a good team because a person of good character vocally stands up and becomes a spokesperson for the team. Particularly since the media often makes money by telling lies, a player of good character will be known for opening his mouth at the right time to say the right thing.

This view seems too doctrinaire to be intelligently applied to any individual. In fact when any general concept is applied to making judgments about any individual before you really meet him/her or apply the lessons learned from "test" (the ones we all use to test assumptions or written formal tests) the you are pre-judging them (hence the word) and this is neither an intelligent way to operate (we all know what happens when one applies assumptions too much or inappropriately) nor a fair way to operate regarding other people/ "Political correctness" is today's popular buzz phrase. In general people seem to use it as a synonym for modern liberal politics (which is of course quite different from classic liberalism). Can a person of conservative ideology be politically correct? It would seem so if political correctness has actual meaning beyond being just another derogatory way of referring to folks on the ideological left. In the old days folks thought it was correct not be coarse in the public commons. Perhaps political correctness is just taking what was formally seen as a courtesy (you said a gal looked great even if you thought it was the most horrible dress you had ever seen) amd extending that to supposed poliical divisions in society. However, there seems to be a lot of money to be made in society by being coarse whether you are Al Franken or Rush Limbaugh. My sense is that society has been cheapened and lessened by paragons of both the left and the right rising to prominence in society. I guess pro football as part of society is not immune to this. I also guess that if political correctness has a root cause it is the dichotomy which existed in a society that uphelf fair play in all things and judging an individual by his own character and abilities rather than judging an individual based on some doctrinaire assumption which may not be true for an individual. The NFL was long a part of these unfair judments of individuals as for examples, regardless of their skills as an athlete or individual leadership qualities they A-As were barred from the role of being an NFL QB. It would seem no wonder that some would demand a form of altered speech often called political correctness to try to defend themselves from the slights (both serious and minor) from society. In the end, it would seem the right thing here is to simply judge individuals as individuals to the extent we can. Application of doctrinaire views may be a workable shorthand that folks have come to rely on the current over-information age, but it seems to be a lousy way to run a railroad or a major spotrt,

I say again that cutting Vincent makes sense if he suddenly hits the wall and cannot produce as happens with older players. However, as he tied for the lead on this team for both INTs and FRs, what are these signs of less production than the other DBs or safeties in particular that folks see beyond the demographic umver of his age. I think the "experts" at Scouts Inc make the same mistake in looking at team building that a lot of people made in judging that the WM draft made no sense because the Bills had former Pro Bowler TH on the roster. Just as having TH to man starting RB duty in the year that WM could not play while rehabbing a major knee injury was essential to having the WM pick make sense, so too does the young retinue of talent the Bills have at DB also increase the value of hanging onto TV as long as his body allows. Particularly with Yobouty where the thought is he should have stayed in school another year, because he is a first round talent with a 3rd round brain who needs a year of training and teaching before he is ready to start. Learning how to be a pro, a teammate and a high chatacter guy from Vincent and former DB turned HC Jauron stikes me as a far better learning opportunity than another year in college. Likewise Simpson and Whitner will benefit from having him around if his body allows for similar production to last year. Beyond this teaching point, the switch from the zone blitz to the cover-2 really plays towards TV's skills. His expertise which won him Pro Bowl berths was as a SB cover guy. In our old zone blitz we employed both of our safeties as hitters as they pinched up on the line. Yhe Cover 2 not only emphasizes pass coverage by the safeties playing centerfielder rather than them playing psuedo-LBs in the zone blitz, in addition, experience will be key as the safeties must read whether the play is a likely pass or a likely run based on down distance and formation. TV certainly has lost a step or two from his youth as we all do. However, if we play more of a Tampa 2 which Fenell is familiar with rather than a classic Cover 2, the field will be divided into 1/3s for the sateties and MLN to cover and thus lessening the need for a bunch of speed if the field were divided in halves. TV could well be cut if the Bills are into retribution and want to get the NFLPA Pres, but such a decision will likely be at a cost to the team as we have to go down the deoth chart in a seatch for a starting FS.

You seem to draw a lot of conclusions about WM's attitude, thinking, level of positive commitment, reasons for doing things, and motivations which far beyond reasonable conclusions which can be drawn from what he has said and what is said about him in the media. Do you have some personal knowledge or interaction with WM which makes these authoritative conclusions reasonable ones to draw? Alternately you may have reached these conclusions based on what we can all read in the media, and given the various incomplete stories and inaccuracies we often see in a media doing this as a business from reports from the business which is the Bills and also the business which is the product Willis McGahee, how do you make judgments on what is believable to draw these conclusions. Even beyond this which may possibly be reasonable in terms of drawing conclusions about WM, the conclusion that Marv and Jauron underestimated the WM problems simply seems to draw conclusions from the brief time Marv and Jauron have been here when they had much more immediate and big decisons to make of which WM was a factor for them to work with but really a small part of the equation. Marv needed to work with his first priority being understanding what his boss Ralph wanted, then getting the best HC he could get with a focus of his time on a zillion factor one of which was WM, but I hope that was a minor occupation for him compared to working with, getting to know and getting control of Modrak and his staff and interviewing and giving serious consideration and thought to attracting and hiring Jauron amidst other candidates like Sherman. Even after this, it would have been nice to be able to focus time and attention on the managing WM issue, but I hope they did not as I think a priority to get more Ws for this team was working with Jauron to build a quality staff. Even as we went through this process, the draft should have been one of their primary occupations though again WM management issues would have been an important sidelight in figuring this out. What the heck else do you think should have been done (that coulda been done besides signing Thomas. it might be one thing that indicated underestimation of problems with WM, if they had heightened reliance on him by cutting RBs on the roster or not going after a credible back-up. However, they did not cut Gates or Wiiliams (not that these two could ever step up to start but if you cut them you actually put more reliance on WM unless you replace them with far better talents. I do not see how the Bills do this is in a draft with far less talent at RB than last year for example. They did pick up Thomas and again though it isdoubtful he can return to the level of consistent starter he was at Chicago, there is no way the Bills can likely afford an James or Alexander if your prescription for taking him seriously is to replace him. So even if you are some great seer of what the future holds, what specifically do based on not underestimating the problems he will/can cause.

I'm pretty sure that Jauron was quoted in one article saying that Peerless has officially been excused from the volutary camp because of a family issue. I think we take them at their word because actually whether he stays or goes will be determined whether he can produce enough to be the #2 or #3 WR on this team (at #3 we probably reached for him a bit with the contract but his contribution to the team will still be high as if his speed is anywhere near what it used to be his prescence in 3 WR sets will warp DC choices as the have to either go with their # 4 CB one on one with Peerless or put a fast guy on him which will weaken the likely double team on Evans. Even if PP has a reasonable excuse it will be a shame and he will have to study harder to catch up, but as far as character goes, if he missed spending time wih a dying or sick close relative like a parent to go to a voluntary camp I would question his character if he showed up.

I once heard a story when I went to college about Neil Rudenstine who was the prvost at 1 Ivy League school and the Prez of another after an Ivy league education. Like many folks in the days of the draft and a different time he entered military service rather than immediately going to Wall St. to collect his winnings. In the Army they gave him their basic English proficiency test and the scores came back and said he was a moron. It turns out that for the simple English language portion he could think of exceptions in the language for every general rule they gave him and he thinking that a knowledgable test maker was trying to fool him so he screwed up the results. My guess is that somebody on the line saved him from endangering his life with a crescent wrench. Even if the story is apocryphal it shows a true point that for a given individual a test is at best an indicator and actually can be a completely false tell as the level of intelligence of the test taker.

Didn't break the bank at all (which is actually a much larger bank due to the new CBA) with this signing but they did pay him a significant bonus which will count against our cap whether we cut him or not. Bennie clearly sucked in his play last year and even worse a chunk of this was die to lack of focus which should have been noted before he signed and can be difficult to change without a personality transplant currently beyond human technology and control. Nevertheless the cap hit means he does get a chance to redeem himself with a new attitude that improves his production. While this is unlikely to occur, as recently as Sam Adams we saw a player with a clear attitude problem which led to him taking a vacaton half the time change his ways in conjunction with signing with the Bills, He not only made the Pro Bowl as a Bill but even TV commentators remarked the Bills were getting more play and fewer vacations out Adams than ever before. My sense is that Anderson may well get cut, but its interesting in bb.com interview with JMac he did make a point of noting only Peters, Gandy and Villarial as returning starters by name and leaving Bennie notable by his absence as falling into let the better man win pool.

Far be it from us to simply let a dead horse lay there, particularly one who seems to like aspects of WNY.

Cliff Notes begin: His 40 times are almost certainly slower but this matters little because: 1. Other indicators like raw yardage gained show he has recovered from his potentially career ending injury to a great degree. 2, The important element in diminishing his 40 time was that he chose to bulk up and put on weight. He traded an ability to survive the constant pounding at the LOS better by putting on muscle weight which likely cost him breakaway speed. This strikes me as a good trade-off to make given pro pounding and the injury he suffered. Cliff notes end The amount of speed issue is relevant to the game of football (some draft gurus forget than even during draft time it is important as to how it hints at a player will do in the game and not in and of itself) in the question of how does that speed help a player succeed playing football. As best as I can tell, WM has in essence recovered from his devastating collegiate injury. The proof in the pudding is not only that he has successfully exceeded 1000 yards rushing in a season twice, but more important he went out of a game because of a leg injury (I think it may have even happened due to an odd cut rather than a hit) and he actually recovered from this nick to run well over 100 yards the next week. Certainly the injury cut at least some small marginal amount of his 40 time, but particularly given the speed base he was working from I doubt this amount is significant. However, what is likely more significant is the likely lessening of his 40 time as he has bulked up a lot since his collegiate days. He clearly committed himself to a heavy duty lifting program at the U in Miami with other players last off-season and I think upped his playing weight by at least 5 pounds and based on some of the increase in reps and weights doing clean-and-kerk and squat lifts the wieght increase was likely muscle. The trade-off appears to be that increased weight to carry and probably development of muscles which support the joints rather than muscles whih add to speed has meant he is more resilient to hits and stronger but has less breakaway speed. I think this becomes important for your question because while changesin 40 time are one way to measure recovery from a leg injury Other indicators such as production of rushing yardage already indicate that basic recovwery has occurred. 4o speed measures are unlikely to tell you anything you do not already know from measures like yardag gained rushing, and in fact, if the 40 times and the rushing yardage indicators differ then one should take the rushing yardage indicator as more relevant anyway. The 40 time measure is in fact deceptive because though it can be a good measure, i root for him to gain yards and not to win relay races. If greater muscles make for a more resilient WM but slow his 40 time, I say by all means slow the 40 time. In fact, it would be great for gaining yards if DB can beat a DB in a footrace, but who cares if WM never even gets to the DBs because WM is not big enough to survive being hit repetitively at the LOS, or his stiff arm is weaker and he gets dragged down without even turning the corner. This is not a question of trading an ability for him to turn a 2 yd. gain into a 4 yard gain but losing the ability to run for 40 yards, it actually is a question of settling for a series of 2 yard gains which never become 49 yard gains because he is to small to take the pounding or not strong enough to stop an opponent with a stiff arm and get outside.

The salary cap! Folks are forced to keep long obvious deadwood like MW (and RJ for another example) alive long after its pretty clear they are not going to produce as expected because he bucks have been handed to them. It seems to be the failure to realize on the part of some that even though this money is sunk it still influences football descisions for a while after it is spent, Perhaps the answer is that in the NFL a chunk of players who would have been cut as deadwood are kept as barely breathing wood.

Unfortunately, life is what happens while we are making plans (I guess that is truth of death as well).

Actually it seem to be more of an effort to try to convince folks that something is a virtually certain fact when actually there is some interesting evidence that indicates the opposite may well turn out to be the case. As a repetitive poster myself, I can say that sheer volume tends to alter the mindset of very few people and actually that pesky thing called reality (remember bacl to the repetitive posts that tried to demonstrate with dead lock certainty that a choice of Harrington was the one for the Bills to make- the bust that Harrington made is the only thing which makes the MW choice not the worst football move of that draft). With my posts or others take the best and leave the rest if you choose to read them, but simply ignoring them is more than a reasonable strategy. I guess the oddest posts are those who waste even a little of their precious time to remark that lengthy or repetitive are a waste of time. As sad as my pre-ccoupation with the Bills is, the decision to waste time complaining about posters wasting time is bizarre.

Even I who was a Travis defender do not have the temerity or insanity to claim that he is anywhere near as good an RB as WM. WM is not god's gift in RB form (and saying he is better than Henry is not saying that for those who would attempt to attack this argument by assuming some bizarre extreme endorsement of WM), but: if TH had finished in top 10 rushers last year if TH had gotten more yards rushing his first two seasons than any other RB in Bills history if TH had the stiff arm WM has if WM also got suspended for substance abuse or if he was much better than WM than him simplyreceiving 40+ passes his best year to WMis receiving 28 his best year then there might be a case that TH was a better RB for the Bills or would theoretically be better know, but these things are not true and the case TH would be better for us than WM is way thin at best.

Its basically an enforced deal the way the CBA is set up and the CBA is set-up the way it is: 1. Because the two parties involved finally after the owners kicked the NFLPAs butt in the lockout of the mid-80s and then the NFLPA finally with the desperate realization that the cards were stacked against them in a mano a mano fight understood the advice that by threatening to diestablish themselves the owners would be forced to cooperate rather than deal with a free market. The CBA is essentially an agreement between the NFL and NFLPA to restrain trade and with the labor peace insured by the cooperation of restrained trade, the NFL made more money than it ever had. Finally in this last CBA the team owners were forced to split the profits with their workers in a method that recognizes the players are the majority revenue beneficiaries in this partnership. The owners took this dimunition of the relationship because they make far more money within the labr peace this brings than they would if their were war. 2. Given these broad parameters the NFLPA is made up of vets not rookies and youngsters. They agreed to the restraint of trade device of the draft as long as it is set-up in a way to guarantee slotted top dollar to the picks and a player minimum which sets a base for building player salaries. Under this system the high level draftees are slotted with huge salaries which drive up salaries for all players. The remainder of the draft and UDFAs get a minimum payment and harsh restaints on trades known as Exclusive Right Free Agency and then Restricted Rights Free Agency and then even Franchise Tags which save the owners from participating in a free market until a player really becomes a Vet. By this time, the player salary does escate a bit as the best players get higher tenders in the Restricted FA period and there is a strong market incentive to extend players like Crowell. However, as far as Peters is concerned he has only put in the time necessary to be an Exclusive Rights FA and having no negotiating ability or leverage it makes little difference who his agent is or what skills they have. If he has a good season this year it makes sense for all parties to extend him and he can apply a little pressure though if the Bills give him the high tender he has little choice but to accept it. Even this will be the biggest paycheck he has ever gotten (just as the current tender is) and as booby prizes go it ain't bad.

The whole thing depends on the balance of players lost and gained in HFA. A team might lose a Clements but if you sign a comparable FA talent you get nothin. This player need not be a CB and there is a black box system which even caoches did not understand and cannot predict. Since the compensation given has dropped as originally in the CBA it was supposed to be phased out entirely most teams seem to ignore this factor until it happens. The black box does assign the compensation picks to specific players but as the Bills somehow got compensated for letting Lonnie Johnson walk this black box result is comical if anything.

I believe he was a kicker with a big leg and little accuract who got a brief camp fodder try out with the Bills a just a few years back.

Actually Posey is not as bad as some posters on TSW would have us think as some posters here find various whipping boys and even when they are correct in judging a player to be inadequate it really is mere coincidence they are right. As best as I can tell (which is no stone cold lock of correctness either hence my overreliance on stats to try to check my thoughts and to invite specific explanations from folks as to why my thoughts are incorrect or should be modified), this is my sense of Posey's career as a Bill: 2003- First FA signed that year as TD made him s handsomr market saavy bid which got him off the market before 1am. He was atttactive because he logged 8 sacks as a Texan though that was in a 3-4. The offense was horrid behind a struggling Bledsoe that year and though the D kept them in play until mid-season it was the O going something like 10 straight quarters without a TD as Kevin Killdrive refused to vary our approach which killed us and really contiunally put the D in bad possitions. Posey also seemed to struggle a bit to get comfortable in a 4-3 rather than a 3-4. However the D proved to be fairly effective as LeBeau had installed a zone blitz of his design though Gray still did the playcalling. Though Posey did not record many highlight reel sacks (with the exception him tattoing David Carr in the endzone and knocking him out of a few games) but he did show some of the experience he had by logging a ton of minutes at OLB in what was statistically the 5th best D in the MFL. An indictment that the Bills were too yds/game stats focus is true that this is not a true measure of who the best D is, however, though it may not be a way to tell whether #1 or #3 is better, it actually does strike me as a fair indicator that this Bills D was clearly not the worst in the NFL and actually was one of the better Ds though maybe not in the top 5. 2004- Posey seemed to step it up a notch and perform well to this watcher. The Bills D improved in its statitical performance to #2 and again while being #2 in the stats does not assure to me that you are actually the second best, this stat can not be rationally totally ignored. This D also logged other stats like turnovers that more closely correlate to the ultimate stat W/L and overall this was one of the better units in the NFL IMHO. Posey deserves great credit for starting all 16 games for a second year in a row, anecdotaaly the role he seemed to play was actually diagnosing plays well because he seemed to divide his time pretty well between pinching in on run support or dripping into the medium zone which allowed Fletcher and Spikes both to log in 3 sacks. Some knowlegable posters such as Simon did complain bitterly about Posey and often sited him taking bad angles or turning the wrong way. They watch the game more closely than I do so I asked them for specific cases where the guy Posey was covering on a pass or an RB ran through him or his spo for a TD or large gain. Mo one ever could name these specific instances where Posey was desmonstrably bad and in the absence of confirming evidence I think it was fair to conclude that a player who logged maximum hours on a statititically successful F where no one could point to specific instamce or gametimes of his failings actually means he played well that year. 2005- The Bills D sucked and Posey was one of those who seem to clearly be at fault for this down turn. He always seem to be a step too slow when he rushed the passer nor could he stop the runner when someone like a Caddillac Williams challenged. Perhaps the issue was that Posey had simply given up when it became clear the D was going to have to carry the O as in 2003. Perhaps an older player he is just done, perhaps the D counter and playcalling by Fray was incorrect. It matters little because the old braintriust is out and its new day under a D minded coach who will install a new system which will demand great reads and reactions by the LBs who also will be counted upon to pick up the trash as our athletic tackles blow through the gaps and pressure the QB and blow-up plays or the LBs have their backs when the DL guesses wrong. Posey needs to look carefully this year at how Spikes is recovering, since if TKO is good enough to play Crowell who filled in for TKO admirably will be a real threat to start at OLB. Given the extension of Stamer and Haggan, Posey is not getting sit on the bench money and probably is a goner this year. The concept of Posey as an end is interesting, but nobody knows at this point. It is unclear how exactly the Bills will line up and play DL this year as one assumes the Marv cliche is operative here that a team must be able to run and also to stop the run. Given the top 4 DTs on the deoth chart all weigh 304 or less there will not be the Big Ted or Phat Pat run stopper in the middle and we are going to do something different this year. Theoretically there is an opening where the back-up to Schobel is the illustrious Mark Word, but the addition of Posey as a DE add yet another lightweight guy to the DL and I will have to see it and see it work to believe this is a good thing.

689678[/snapback] Many thanks. I write all this crap so I know it must be a difficult thing to read through it an translate. I tried Cliffnoting buy found my wife was gettin bugged already with me takin the time to write it I found I rarely had time to summarize. It is appreciated though so thanks.

While WM's per game rushing average during the last half of the Bills offensively imploded season might be found by falling off a log at the height of the FA market (do you consider by the way the major scratch laid out to buy the services of FA's like Alexander and James to be falling off a log, and if not what specific FAs and the amount of cash they cost are you talking about?), I really doubt you are not silly enough to make grand football decisions based on 8 games worth of performance. Let's look at this another way that fully includes all the facts. What specific FA RBs which can be found as simply as falling off a long not only sport WM's pedestrian 3.9 yd/carry career rushing avg. AND have scored 17 TDs in that time, AND have racked up well over 2000 yards rushing, and even have caught about 50 passes in his 2 year career. I actually doubt there are very many FA RBs who have amsassed comporable stats over the 25 gamess WM started in his career or even if you looked at their production over the full 32 games of the last two years. Given the fullness of your claim it would seem you would be able to name available RBs the Bills should have purchased in FA as simply as falling off a log. I'm sure you can do this but there is no way you would make such a broad claim if you merely were making this judgments on 8 games or so of results rather than more reasonably looking at the last two years. I think TD did roll the dice when he bucked the NFL wisdom and chose WM in the first. The upside of doing this was clear if WM had actually recovered from what seemed to be a career ending injury, taken over the starting RD job, made it an easier matter to trade TH and the Bills has gotten a first day pick for him. Perhaps this upside might have been obtained if WM rushed for over 2000 yds in his first two years. However, his yds/carry was only 3,8 and even though a majority of the backs in the top 10 rushers on NFL.comm were no higher than 4.3, I guess if WM did not prove to be Shaun Alexander we crapped out. Geck I here we could get Antowain Smith.

The worst thing about aspects of this debate, many debates on TSW, and unfortunately a seeming;y growing part of our culture is that folks seem to want to pretend that the extreme about the other side and also there side is true. Sorry these athletes are human and it just does not work that way in real life. If you read this thread the some arguments would have you believe that Travis was the greatest thing since sliced bread and we downgraded horribly to WM (who merely got to 2000 yards rushing faster than any RB in Bills history). Alternately some folks talk about Henry as though he sucked, could never hold on to the rock and we lost nothing when trading him awat. Both extreme views are incorrect, Travis was a very good RB for us who sprung from a 3rd round pick to earn and deserve his Pro Bowl reserve nod picking up over 1400 yards rushing and hauling in over 40 recents, I think he deserved the Pro Bowl reserve nod even though he did give up 6 fumbles that year. Fumbles are a bad thing, but the good news is that with, good coaching assessment of the sometimes subtle changes in carrying style needed, diligent work, and some good fortune and bounces by this oddly shaped ball the problem can be remedied as it was by Henry and by Tiki Barber. Yet TH did have issues such as a lack of outside speed which allowed LBs to cheat to the inside and substance abuse issues. TD made a great deal by taking advantage of TH getting himself in financial trouble to buy an extra year of his rights for chump change, then he could read the TH character issue handwriting on the wall and was smart enough to see that the extra year ownership of TH rights allowed the Bills to draft a top 5 draft talent at #23 and let him rehab and not play for a year. In addition, TD was nothing short of brilliant and tough as nails as he simply sar on the draft pick while folks like Shelton were waived in his face and the draft yielded good RBs to our potential trade partners. However he read the market correctly to knoe he could still hold out and got a 1st day pick in exchange for TH. TH was neither totally without value nor totally a great player, and folks descending into extremes may make for good Hannity and Colmes entertainment but makes for really bad football arguing. Such is the case with WM, he made a great comeback from a devastating injury, and successfully rushed for a ton of yards. However, he ain't perfect and questions need to be answered about how much of the rushing outage he suffered last year was due to the meltdown of Bills blocking and offense and how much was on him. The flat out answer to what should we do about WM? Wait and see.

I know I have prominenly and repetively pointed out that WM got to 2000 yard rushing quicker than any RB in Bills history and this is notable when you consider this includes RB studs like OJ and TT. However, I have never believed that this fact means that WM is a more productive RB than OJ and Thurman. Folks may have falsely jumped to that conclusion or maybe in some post somewhere I accidently said something which could be construed that way. However, just as you said it would be stupid to conclude that WM is more productive back simply because he put up more rushing yards early in his career that OJ or TT. That being said, the accomplishment is an impressive one from any sane point of view. it does not mean WM is the perfect RB, but it does mean he ain't simply chopped live either. Citing WM's rushing accomplishments has no value if one wants to assert he is a more productive RB than the Bills greats. However, this factoid does have great value in response to those who argue that Willis sucks as an RB, that he should be cut becaue he is too Moulds like in non-childrearing, or are simply outraged that he has only averaged 3.8 rushes per carry last year when 5 or 6 of the the top 10 RB yard gainers averaged 4.3 or less. Perhaps you were referring to some other posts that did make this farcical jump to somehow conlcude this adds up to WM being a more productive RB than the Bills greats. However, one thing which is typical of a lot of the banter back and forth on TSW (or Haniity and Colmes or Nancy Grace's show on CNN) is rather than trying to respond to an opposing point of view in a way that increases knowledge by finding consensus, folks devolve into drawing bizarre and outrageous conclusions from these points and then arguing that the original point was outrageous. Yes it is outreageous to conclude WM is more productive RB than Thuirman, but it is simply the facts that WM rushed for 2000 yards quicker than any other Bill and this is part of the reason why it would be outrageous to declare WM a failure at this point. It is a fact that his performace has disappointed some folks, but this says alot more about these fans outrageous expectation not based on a sense of real football than it says something about WMs performance as a player.