JimBob2232 Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Oh, one more thing. Had we kept the #14 pick in 2003, we would have likely taken either: DE Micheal Haynes (27 games (career) 42 tackes, 4 sacks) Or DE Jerome McDougle (16games 19 tackles, 1 sack.) Now, do either of them do anything for you? I'd almost rather have bledsoe.
ATBNG Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 The best analogy that I can come up with is that the Losman trade is like buying a lottery ticket. Until the drawing is held, it is impossible to say whether the decision will or will not be correct, but it is fair to say that it was decidedly against the odds. The smart move is not to play the lottery. I'm not writing JP off - it really has nothing to do with him - but merely finding fault with a GM who would deal a 15, a 43, and a 144 for a 22. There will be exceptions when the 22 adds up to more than the 15, 43, and 144, but they will be rare. We certainly don't have any evidence that this is one of those cases yet (if anything, Jones at 43 has shown more than Losman at 22, and Dallas still have the highest pick in the deal in hand).
millbank Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Is it possible Tom Donahoe will just retain his Presidents position and Tom Modrak will become the General Manager.....?
ATBNG Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 It is not an atrocious deal when you consider the QBs available in FA this coming season and the QBs in the draft. There are none that have the potential that JP does. Zero. To give up 2 picks and address your teams biggest weakness (as percieved by some) is nothing. If JP turns out to be a probowler would you still consider this an awful trade? 140573[/snapback] Baltimore did a very similar thing in 2003. They overpaid for Boller because they were desperate for a QB, but justified it using this logic. Now a year and a half later, he's still merely adequate - not a significant upgrade from Anthony Wright, and has shown nothing in terms of evolving into a better pro prospect. Meanwhile, New England has Eugene Wilson and Vince Wilfork. Besides McGahee and (maybe) Dallas Clark, hardly anyone taken between Boller and Wilson is better than Wilson himself, and of the three Wilson might be the best fit for their needs in the first place.
JimBob2232 Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 And for those of you complaining about the 2002 draft, take a look at it. http://ww2.nfl.com/draft/2002/round/round1.html What an ugly draft that was!
ajzepp Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 The argument that the Bledsoe trade was a TD failure holds no water with the success of McGahee.......PP was not going to get paid here anyway, so the fact that TD pulled a first rounder out of the deal - Willis - means we got Bledsoe and a blue chip player for the price of whatever draft pick we sent to NE. I'd make that deal again today in a heartbeat, regardless of the fact that I think it's time for Drew to step aside.
Deep2Moulds46 Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 This is one of the better Pro-Donahoe threads I have read on any Buffalo Bills board. I see what you are saying about building for the future...as opposed to going for the quick fix..and then rebuilding again. I wouldn't however extend his contract yet....and by yet I mean today. What happens if this team loses in Miami....and then goes on to lose 3 more games after that and they finish 6-10 again? I also want to see his approach this offseason. This is the first time since he has been here that he is going to have to make tough personell decisions on " his guys" . By his guys I don't mean stop gap players like Eddie Robinson ...I mean important core players that he drafted or traded for . ( Drew Bledsoe, Travis Henry and Jonas Jennings). Lets also see how he handles the Pat Williams situation. Pat Williams is 32 years old ( or at least he will be next season)..but he is still playing at a very high level....and he ..along with Sam Adams are the anchor of our elite defense. Everything this defense does scheme wise depends on 2 DT's upfront clogging the inside running...and keeping the O-Line off of our LB core. As a Bills fan...I really want to see this work with T.D. Think about it like this. If T.D is kept around for 1 more year...and then not given an extension.....the Bills will then get a new GM / President ( obviously assuming Modrak doesn't just get a promotion which I wouldn't think would happen..since Modrak is TD"s boy). You get a new GM who is going to want to bring in his own coach....so you would probably see a 1 year bridge gap where the new GM works with Mularkey ( this is now 2006)...and there is confusion . Then, by 2007....the new GM lets Mularkey go....and finds a new coach who will inherit Mularkey's roster...and need a year to install his system. It will be 2008 before the roster starts to finally resemble what the New GM/ New Head coach envision it to look like.....and if the team has stuggled the past few years with all of the turnover.....the New GM will be under a lot of scruitny and on a short leash......and unless 2008 brings success...we could see the whole process start over again. I really want to see this work with Donahoe/ Mularkey. Not only because obviously would it mean the Bills are successful....but it means less turnover from top to bottom...and consistency throughout the organization.
Nanker Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 I know a few weeks ago half this board wanted to fire the guy, but the bottom line is he has put us in a position to be a major player for Super Bowl XL in Detroit, Ralph's home town. I hate to break the news, but SB XL was played on Jan. 25, 1981 Oakland 27, Philadelphia 10. Sure his W-L record to date sucks, No argument here, and having a great W-L record remains the BEST way to get to the big dance. He hasn't spent millions for outright FA busts as others have done. Well, he certainly hasn't overpaid to bring competence to the OLine now has he. You can put the 0-4 start of this year squarely on the shoulders of the rag-tag OLine, and THAT little Donnaho oversight will likely be the difference in the Bills not getting into the playoffs this year. Not that Drew could take us deep anyway. I'll always remember the big contributions that Eddie Robinson and Oliver Gibson made. I'm especially enjoying Troy Vincent's play this year. He's a very exciting interview. He gives good mike. TD has us on the verge of being a dominant team, wait till next year really means something this time. He deserves an extension and the time is now. 140405[/snapback] Wait til next year really means the same thing year in and year out. The Bills do look like they've found their way around the corner - Praise the Lord. But this team has already paid a terrible price for his gambling style of management. George Allen said it best over twenty years ago, "The future is NOW!" Sorry to hear so many haven't heard the message and think the future is always "Waiting for next year." I'm in favor of giving him an extension. Make it a phone extension in his garage.
mary owen Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 I agree with some of your post. the only thing i don't agree with is that we must extend him NOW. I don't see him getting interest from other clubs. I think he stays on and accepts what Ralph gives him when the time comes. He's in no postion to cement his future here any further than he already is. While some of those moves were good, some were downright horrible. We are not even in the playoffs. We are going to rush to extend him now because we won a few ball games and we are still below .500??? I don't get it.
taterhill Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 I hate to break the news, but SB XL was played on Jan. 25, 1981 Oakland 27, Philadelphia 10. 140612[/snapback] that was Super Bowl XV...XL=40
Toledo Bill Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 I'm ready to eat some crow. Following the Williams fiasco, Donahoe's arrogance and the 0 and 4 start, I wanted his head. Beating St. Louis and Seattle might not be true tests, but I am hoping I was totally wrong and that he might be a winner after all. I want to see how the rest of the year and 2005 turns out, but my opinion is shifting.
Coach Tuesday Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Donahoe should be showered with praise for converting an awful defense into a dominant one in less than 3 years. Truly an impressive feat. Unfortunately, that's only 1/2 of what you need to win a Superbowl - the other half is a dominant offensive line. Donahoe has failed miserably at this project - until this part of this season, our line hasn't even been respectable or even physical, let alone dominant. Furthermore, this is a very important offseason - a number of key players will be FAs (Jennings the most important), he needs to draft a CB and extend one or both of our current starters (Clements and McGee), and some of the vets on D are getting up in years (Fletcher, Milloy, Adams, Vincent) - meaning without a good draft/offseason, our D could actually slip, as could our o-line if Jennings is not replaced adequately. I say the jury is still out - next year is huge - let's not start faxing contract proposals back and forth quite yet.
Guest Guest Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 as could our o-line if Jennings is not replaced adequately. 140653[/snapback] Yes, it will be quite difficult to purchase a piece of cardboard, paint a smiley face on it and prop it up at LT. Thats essentially what we get with Jennings. At least the piece of cardboard will come cheaper, and probably get hurt less often.
Coach Tuesday Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Yes, it will be quite difficult to purchase a piece of cardboard, paint a smiley face on it and prop it up at LT. Thats essentially what we get with Jennings. At least the piece of cardboard will come cheaper, and probably get hurt less often. 140656[/snapback] You have no idea what you're talking about (which is probably why you don't sign in). Notice how Seattle only sacked Drew after Jennings limped off? Believe me, you'd notice if Jennings was ineffective. He is injury prone, and he had no business suiting up for the game in the Meadowlands this year, but other than that he's been our most consistent lineman. He's not worth what he'll be asking though, which is why Donahoe needs to have a sound strategy in place for replacing him.
ICE Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Are you on fuggin Crack? the sombitch STILL has a losing record. the BILLS STILL HAVE A LOSING RECORD! IF we make it past the first round of the playoffs AFTER a winning record...THEN even consider it. I don't give a sh-- about 'heading in the right direction' GET THERE then we talk.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 people are so quick to cast aside the fact that in 3 years, donahoe rebuilt a defense that was #2 overall last season and is even better this season, in INTs, sacks, pressures, and every other conceivable stat. In a tougher schedule. The defense is stacked and poised to be good for many years. Look around the league and tell me how many franchises went from a rebuilding year to a consistently dominating defense in 3 years, with long term, cap friendly contracts. Mularkey will take the offense to the level that our defense and special teams are playing. And when we get there, watch out. We've seen it two weeks straight. Keep watching. Your support of Tom DOnahoe will crystalize. 140553[/snapback] I love the defense, I've said that many-a time. It's much more solid than Butler's was. That being said, Defense wasn't really our problem. OFFENSE was. And to wit, the offense (until the emergence of McGahee) wasn't that great. Now it's mediocre. If it can just cross the threshold to good.....this team could be dangerous.
Simon Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Well, he certainly hasn't overpaid to bring competence to the OLine now has he. You can put the 0-4 start of this year squarely on the shoulders of the rag-tag OLine, Donahoe has failed miserably at this project - until this part of this season, our line hasn't even been respectable or even physical, let alone dominant. You're both nuts. Even though they had little time together as a unit, this OLine has been playing well since the very first week of the season. It's just taken most of us 3 months to realize it. Cya
Beerball Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Leaving aside all of the points both positive and negative that have been made to this point I have to ask...Why do you want to extend TD contract today? If it was your money, not Ralph's, why would you extend TDs contract? Are people beating down his door today trying to hire him away? Don't think so. Do you see TD being such a hot comodity when he is up for review that it will cost significantly less to sign him today? Possibly, but don't think so. If TD is lured away will the franchise collapse? Slim possibility, but don't think so. How much of your money would you be willing to pony up for a GM with a losing record? Has he done some good things? Yes he has. Is he worthy of an extension today? Not if it's my money he isn't. I don't see the benefit.
Guest Guest_Coach_Tuesday Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 You're both nuts. Even though they had little time together as a unit, this OLine has been playing well since the very first week of the season. It's just taken most of us 3 months to realize it.Cya 140678[/snapback] I would suggest to you that the o-line was attrocious in the first Jets game (until the final drive), below average in the Oakland game (made worse by Bledsoe's bad decision-making), bad at critical moments in the first Patriots game (including the famous 4th-and-1 play), and average-to-below-average in the Baltimore game. They've been dominant the last two games, against Arizona and Miami, and for most of the second Jets game.
ICE Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 You're both nuts. Even though they had little time together as a unit, this OLine has been playing well since the very first week of the season. It's just taken most of us 3 months to realize it.Cya 140678[/snapback] Now Simon, you know good and well that it has been the OL, Officials, Defense, Special teams and Coaching that has caused our offensive problems. Nothing else....(sarcasm off)
Recommended Posts