Whitner gone?

[JohnC]

And that is the major problem we have around here.

 

The Littman/Overdorf undue influence within the organization issue never has made sense to me. They are the owner's handpicked surrogates. They act on his behalf. While the owner has never been reluctant to make changes on the football side of the operation he has kept them entrenched in the bowels of the organization throughout most of the franchise's tumultuous history. In fact, there where numerous stories about the epic profane battles between Polian and Littman. It was the onwer who sent Polian packing and kept Littman watching the franchise's financial ledger. My basic point is that the both of them are doing the bidding of the owner. They certainly are not rogue agents acting outside of the authority given by the owner.

 

Nucci, I have read your previous postings on this topic. It appears to me that you and I have come to the same judgment on this issue.

[Coach Tuesday]

The Littman/Overdorf undue influence within the organization issue never has made sense to me. They are the owner's handpicked surrogates. They act on his behalf. While the owner has never been reluctant to make changes on the football side of the operation he has kept them entrenched in the bowels of the organization throughout most of the franchise's tumultuous history. In fact, there where numerous stories about the epic profane battles between Polian and Littman. It was the onwer who sent Polian packing and kept Littman watching the franchise's financial ledger. My basic point is that the both of them are doing the bidding of the owner. They certainly are not rogue agents acting outside of the authority given by the owner.

 

Nucci, I have read your previous postings on this topic. It appears to me that you and I have come to the same judgment on this issue.

 

I don't think anyone is absolving Ralph, if that's what you're getting at...

[nucci]

The Littman/Overdorf undue influence within the organization issue never has made sense to me. They are the owner's handpicked surrogates. They act on his behalf. While the owner has never been reluctant to make changes on the football side of the operation he has kept them entrenched in the bowels of the organization throughout most of the franchise's tumultuous history. In fact, there where numerous stories about the epic profane battles between Polian and Littman. It was the onwer who sent Polian packing and kept Littman watching the franchise's financial ledger. My basic point is that the both of them are doing the bidding of the owner. They certainly are not rogue agents acting outside of the authority given by the owner.

 

Nucci, I have read your previous postings on this topic. It appears to me that you and I have come to the same judgment on this issue.

Yeah John. I don't get it. Ralph seems to know a lot about the game but leaves the financial decisions to these two who don't know anything about football.

[tennesseeboy]

I kind of see this as gamesmanship. Whitner would like a deal but the Bills don't see him as one of those "must have" guys although they are ready to bargain. I suspect Whitner will test the free agent market and would not be surprised if he gets a good deal. It is a business after all.

[Bob in STL]

I predict he signs in the division. The reaction here will be, Good, we get to play against that scrub twice a year. That reaction will be short-lived.

 

 

The Pats* need veteran help.

[Erik]

The Pats* need veteran help.

 

Whitner wouldn't start on the Pats. They have Meriweather, James Sanders, and Chung, they are real high on all of those guys. Whitner will definitely start somewhere. I can see the Browns taking a flier on him.

[JohnC]

I don't think anyone is absolving Ralph, if that's what you're getting at...

 

It's not an issue of absolving Ralph or anyone else. The real issue is what is the source of the main systemic problems for this struggling franchise and what are the solutions? If the owner allows the football people to make the decisions they should be making without interference from his business representatives then the franchise will make progress. The organizational structure never made sense from a football standpoint. However, tt made a lot of sense for its ability to extract money out of its business venture.

Edited December 17, 2010 by JohnC

[Bob in STL]

For a (predominately) Strong Safety he is excellent in coverage. He isn't a shut-down corner (virtually no SS's are) but he is just fine in coverage. So good, that he has been used as a FS and even a nickel corner by Bills coaches over the years. I will say he does sometimes have trouble with the bigger and quicker TEs. Fact is, so do most safeties.

 

What you seem to miss is, Whitner typically STONES the receiver right after a catch is made, if it is made. He rarely gives up RAC. Winfield is similar in his CB coverage, BTW. And, like Winfield, Whitner is not the kind of DB that gets a lot of turnovers. If there is a real hole in his game it is that he misses some opportunities for turnovers.

 

Turnovers are big deals, I admit that. But not every player who gets turnovers is a sound defensive player. Byrd is one example. Last year he was often a liability in coverage. He certainly redeemed himself by being in the right place at the right time, and making the big play when it presented itself. Nobody who carefully watches DBs would tell you he was a solid DB, though. He wasn't. Remember Kelso and Shultz when they played Safety for the Bills? They also were good at getting turnovers, but were far from sound every down defensive backs.

 

And let's not underestimate how important tackles are for a defensive player. I remember a game this year where Whitner made three touchdown saving tackles on one drive. Guess what? The opposing team eventually scored a TD on that drive. It wasn't Whitner's fault they eventually scored. But for those who only care about highlight hits, turnovers and such, those tackles weren't even noticed. I think you may have even singled him out as a goat in that game, because he dropped a potential INT. If I'm not mistaken, you also called him out in a game when he had EIGHTEEN tackles (against the Steelers). If I am wrong, I apologize. If you didn't single him out for making EIGHTEEN tackles in one game, then I take back the apology. You always make a point of highlighting any mistake he makes. But rarely do you point out his regular solid efforts.

 

Most of Whitner's tackles come on plays where he isn't the defensive player with the primary responsibility. That means he is pursuing, and mostly it means he actually makes the tackle. This on a team that right now seems to have some tackling issues.

 

I know you will never forgive him for being drafted early in the first round. But that happened years ago. Now you should be looking at him as a Buffalo Bills who is one of the anchors of the defense. Think of it this way. If the Bills had drafted Ngata, then he'd be the guy leaving to FA when his contract is up, and the Bills can hardly afford to lose good linemen.

 

 

Great points Dean.

 

I do not think we got the value from him we could have at #8 overall but I am not going to blame Whitner for that.

 

He is very solid in coverage for a SS and he is good against the run. He can even play nickel.

 

The part of his game that lacks is the turnovers and big plays. Which is why most of the "experts" here think that he sucks.

 

I would not pay him as much he got as a rookie, but I would be trying to keep him and build some continuity on this team. We can't keep drafting DB and RBs in the the first round for another decade.

 

I could see him going to NE or maybe even the Jets.

Edited December 17, 2010 by Bob in STL

[Coach Tuesday]

It's not an issue of absolving Ralph or anyone else. The real issue is what is the source of the main systemic problems for this struggling franchise and what are the solutions? If the owner allows the football people to make the decisions they should be making without interference from his business representatives then the franchise will make progress. The organizational structure never made sense from a football standpoint. However, tt made a lot of sense for its ability to extract money out of its business venture.

 

This owner isn't going to do that - I think it's been proven over and over again. And that's why many of us think that this team will continue to suck until nature takes its course. Sorry to have to put it that way, I just view it as a cold reality.

[Bob in STL]

Whitner wouldn't start on the Pats. They have Meriweather, James Sanders, and Chung, they are real high on all of those guys. Whitner will definitely start somewhere. I can see the Browns taking a flier on him.

 

 

They may be high on them but the results are not there.

[Coach Tuesday]

They may be high on them but the results are not there.

 

Exactly. Whitner would start at SS for the Pats in a heartbeat, and is just the kind of player Belichick covets - smart, versatile, film room nerd, veteran leader with a tinge of attitude.

Edited December 17, 2010 by Coach Tuesday

[dave mcbride]

It seems to me that Whitner is pretty clearly a top-half-of-the-league starting safety. He's versatile, rarely out of position, covers decently enough, is fast enough, and makes a ton of tackles. Given the holes on this team, why on earth would the Bills let him go? I mean, it's not like he's going to break the bank, and the Bills' payroll is so small (relatively speaking) right now that it wouldn't matter. They're going to cut Maybin next year and he'll be off the books, their QB costs a pittance, and Evans will cost only 4 million next year. Who else on that team is getting paid? Not Kelsay, really--as I've pointed out numerous times, his contract is really a mid-teen four-year contract, not a $24 million one. I ask again: who else are they paying besides Spiller and McKelvin? This defense needs as many decent players as it can get; Whitner is one.

 

For a (predominately) Strong Safety he is excellent in coverage. He isn't a shut-down corner (virtually no SS's are) but he is just fine in coverage. So good, that he has been used as a FS and even a nickel corner by Bills coaches over the years. I will say he does sometimes have trouble with the bigger and quicker TEs. Fact is, so do most safeties.

 

What you seem to miss is, Whitner typically STONES the receiver right after a catch is made, if it is made. He rarely gives up RAC. Winfield is similar in his CB coverage, BTW. And, like Winfield, Whitner is not the kind of DB that gets a lot of turnovers. If there is a real hole in his game it is that he misses some opportunities for turnovers.

 

Turnovers are big deals, I admit that. But not every player who gets turnovers is a sound defensive player. Byrd is one example. Last year he was often a liability in coverage. He certainly redeemed himself by being in the right place at the right time, and making the big play when it presented itself. Nobody who carefully watches DBs would tell you he was a solid DB, though. He wasn't. Remember Kelso and Shultz when they played Safety for the Bills? They also were good at getting turnovers, but were far from sound every down defensive backs.

 

And let's not underestimate how important tackles are for a defensive player. I remember a game this year where Whitner made three touchdown saving tackles on one drive. Guess what? The opposing team eventually scored a TD on that drive. It wasn't Whitner's fault they eventually scored. But for those who only care about highlight hits, turnovers and such, those tackles weren't even noticed. I think you may have even singled him out as a goat in that game, because he dropped a potential INT. If I'm not mistaken, you also called him out in a game when he had EIGHTEEN tackles (against the Steelers). If I am wrong, I apologize. If you didn't single him out for making EIGHTEEN tackles in one game, then I take back the apology. You always make a point of highlighting any mistake he makes. But rarely do you point out his regular solid efforts.

 

Most of Whitner's tackles come on plays where he isn't the defensive player with the primary responsibility. That means he is pursuing, and mostly it means he actually makes the tackle. This on a team that right now seems to have some tackling issues.

 

I know you will never forgive him for being drafted early in the first round. But that happened years ago. Now you should be looking at him as a Buffalo Bills who is one of the anchors of the defense. Think of it this way. If the Bills had drafted Ngata, then he'd be the guy leaving to FA when his contract is up, and the Bills can hardly afford to lose good linemen.

Game, set, match.

[ColdBlueNorth]

Great points Dean.

 

I do not think we got the value from him we could have at #8 overall but I am not going to blame Whitner for that.

 

He is very solid in coverage for a SS and he is good against the run. He can even play nickel.

 

The part of his game that lacks is the turnovers and big plays. Which is why most of the "experts" here think that he sucks.

 

I would not pay him as much he got as a rookie, but I would be trying to keep him and build some continuity on this team. We can't keep drafting DB and RBs in the the first round for another decade.

 

I could see him going to NE or maybe even the Jets.

 

What it probably comes down to for the Bills brass is simply that they have Byrd developing nicely as thier FS and they may want to find one player that is more of a prototypical SS rather than using the 3-headed solution of Whitner, Scott, and Wilson.

 

I have nothing against Whitner, his strengths lie in his well-documented versatility. He's a high character guy and he has played through injuries, etc...

 

The way I see it though is that this front office really is not satisfied with our current crop of strong safeties. The reason I say that is that they haven't gone out of their way to lock up any of them. Wilson's contract is done this year, Scott's contract is done in 2011, and Whitner says they are not close on his deal.

 

I wouldn't have thought this before, but perhaps the front office is tipping its hand on where they are going to go in the draft. I thought for sure that they would take a big D-Lineman with their first pick, but perhaps they are leaning towards a true SS like McDaniel (mean streak and some baggage), or perhaps they feel that they can grab a SS to play a bit closer to the line later in the draft like Bama's Barron?

 

All I know is I am glad I do not work in the Bills FO, if I did they would have been wheeling Thurman, Bruce, Andre, and Jimbo out onto the field in wheelchairs every 20th play or so because I would have never wanted to let them walk or tell them their careers with the Bills was winding down.

 

Certainly Whitner has a lot more football ahead of him, but if you feel you can upgrade a position to make the team better, you have to be able to pull the trigger. I just hope it is that and not some cheap-ass way of letting a good player walk to the detriment of the team to save a few $$$ ala Pat Williams and Winfield.

[BillsVet]

I mean, it's not like he's going to break the bank, and the Bills' payroll is so small (relatively speaking) right now that it wouldn't matter. They're going to cut Maybin next year and he'll be off the books, their QB costs a pittance, and Evans will cost only 4 million next year. Who else on that team is getting paid? Not Kelsay, really--as I've pointed out numerous times, his contract is really a mid-teen four-year contract, not a $24 million one. I ask again: who else are they paying besides Spiller and McKelvin? This defense needs as many decent players as it can get; Whitner is one.

 

 

Game, set, match.

 

You could make the case the Bills are cutting payroll, although in fairness many teams across the NFL are doing that in anticipation of the union decertifying. This is a cost over replacement argument, not necessarily about whether to re-sign the guy. He's not an impact player, but it sounds on the surface like he wants to be paid like one. If the team thinks they can get similar production at less cost, they'll do it and save the money in the long and short term.

 

Buffalo's roster is stocked with predominantly lower to mid range paid players. It wouldn't shock me to see payroll cut even further, given that I don't see the team playing in UFA should the. That is, provided the CBA is worked out.

Edited December 17, 2010 by BillsVet

[dave mcbride]

You could make the case the Bills are cutting payroll, although in fairness many teams across the NFL are doing that in anticipation of the union decertifying. This is a cost over replacement argument, not necessarily about whether to re-sign the guy. He's not an impact player, but it sounds on the surface like he wants to be paid like one. If the team thinks they can get similar production at less cost, they'll do it and save the money in the long and short term.

 

Buffalo's roster is stocked with predominantly lower to mid range paid players. It wouldn't shock me to see payroll cut even further, given that I don't see the team playing in UFA should the. That is, provided the CBA is worked out.

Using baseball WAR logic, I do think that Whitner is probably better than an average replacement player. Good teams that want to win are almost always willing to slightly overpay for talent too. I do realize that the Bills aren't one of those teams ...

[Sisyphean Bills]

Using baseball WAR logic, I do think that Whitner is probably better than an average replacement player. Good teams that want to win are almost always willing to slightly overpay for talent too. I do realize that the Bills aren't one of those teams ...

That's pretty much it. From a pure accounting perspective, Whitner is not worth overpaying. Factors such as him wanting to be here, being a pretty solid player, and well respected by teammates aren't quantified on the ledger. If he was willing to hug his ankles to help out the home team, he'd have been extended already and welcomed back regardless and irrespective of his play.

[JohnC]

This owner isn't going to do that - I think it's been proven over and over again. And that's why many of us think that this team will continue to suck until nature takes its course. Sorry to have to put it that way, I just view it as a cold reality.

 

There isn't anyone who is more critical than the owner than I am. But there is some hope that the very aged owner has seen the light. My basis for my cautious optimism is when he stated that the turnaround was going to take some time, possibly after his departure. Why would I draw some optimism from his sobering comments? Because it tells me that he wants a team built the right way and for the long haul.

 

Another reason that I am cautiously optimistic is that Nix has stated his formula on how to build a sustainable winner. It is primarily through the draft, developing your own players and then retaining them. It certainly isn't a novel approach. But it is a proven formula that has worked for almost all the successful teams in the NFL. Buddy Nix has worked with Polian in Buffalo and with Butler/A.J.Smith is San Diego. He witnessed firsthand how a rebuilding process should be done.

Edited December 17, 2010 by JohnC

[Malazan]

Exactly. Whitner would start at SS for the Pats in a heartbeat, and is just the kind of player Belichick covets - smart, versatile, film room nerd, veteran leader with a tinge of attitude.

 

BB likes guys who tweet every thought in their head?

 

I'm not for or against bringing him back at this point as we don't know the details. I think he's good and has a good year (in a contract year) so the factors are too unknown at this point to make a call on whether he should be kept.

[Erik]

BB likes guys who tweet every thought in their head?

I'm not for or against bringing him back at this point as we don't know the details. I think he's good and has a good year (in a contract year) so the factors are too unknown at this point to make a call on whether he should be kept.

 

You think BB actually cares about this if they can play? Wasn't Hernandez one of the guys at Florida last year who wasn't shy about his love of marijuana, Belichek didn't seem to care about that. I don't think tweeting is going to bother him all that much. It's really not a consideration to be honest. Do you think front offices sit in a war room while discussing off season strategy and say "let's take this guy off of our board because he tweets too much."?

 

Say what you will about his play but his tweeting that everyone on the board is so up in arms about is not a factor in any contract negotiation.

[Dawgg]

Exactly. Whitner would start at SS for the Pats in a heartbeat, and is just the kind of player Belichick covets - smart, versatile, film room nerd, veteran leader with a tinge of attitude.

 

I guess on-field productivity doesn't matter to Bill Belichick.