Donahoe Crow?

[buffalo mike]

Let me be first in line to eat a large bowl of crow. The way the Bills are playing now. I thought this guy was as gone as spring. Better renew that contract this off-season.

Donahoe's Future Secured: What a difference two months make. When the Bills were 1-5 it appeared that Tom Donahoe's job may be in jeoparday. The recent surge has caused Ralph Wilson to say that Donahoe can stay in Buffalo indefinitely. Donahoe has also said he wants his job in Buffalo to be his last. His contract runs through the 2005 season but the owner plans on talking to Donahoe in the off season about an extension

[SuperBills12]

for the record, I always liked Donahoe...For what its worth, he's made things exciting at One Bills Drive

[Campy]

for the record, I always liked Donahoe

159559[/snapback]

Me too.

[Guest Guest]

I'm holding off judgement until the end of next year, just in case this is 2002 all over.

[Thailog80]

I'm holding off judgement until the end of next year, just in case this is 2002 all over.

159631[/snapback]

 

Exactly. Fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me.

[buffalo mike]

Exactly. Fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me.

159633[/snapback]

If they finish 10-6, I'll throw some Frank's hot sauce all over a bowl of crow and gobble it down.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

My sense is that TD has demonstrated for quite a while that he has a very good feel for the game and a great feel for negotiatingin the interests of his team (he generally sets good football goals and makes them so by cutting deals which benefit the the team). However, amidst this lovefest judgment, TD also is the victim of a very human failing that in my judgment upon arrival here he had a prime motivation of never again allowing the HC he hired to be in a position to fire him.

 

I find it hard to begrudge him what I perceive (perhaps incorrectly, but if you judge him to be above this human foible and failing then I'm all eyes to see the evidence that he is above this human failing) to be a natural reaction to the shock of being fired and run out of town.

 

I think this failing has been evident in several of his actions:

 

1. It took him awhile to hire an HC and despite many openings that year and other teams snapping up the hot candidates early (a speed which I think was prompted by a clear need for the NFL to achieve an end to years of discrimination against African-American HCs so teams hired fast to avoid the pressure to hire an A-A when they might have wanted someone else for whatever reason). TDs delay made little sense to me as the rapid hiring of candidates not only removed some of the best HC candidates, but good assistants also got snapped up.

 

By waiting however, TD put himself in a position of power and the driver's seat in having the only opening available to the remaining candidates (at that point coaches on team's still playing could not negotiate and thus John Fox from NYG and Marvin Lewis were left twisting by their team's playoff runs. it looks to me as though he waited to which hurt the Bills because their was a weaker pool of assistant coaches but it helped him be in the drivers seat in picking and negotiating with his HC.

 

2. His HC choice (GW) was ultimately a bad one and makes sense to me only in that he chose a guy who would not take him on like Cowher did and if he did he could beat him. TD passed over two clearly better choices for HC in John Fox and Marvin Lewis. Both of these men produced far better results than GW in their first year of work than GW while taking on situations which were close to the Bills situation in terms of the HC inheriting a bad situation. In terms of the long-term Fox made the SB, the jury is still out on Lewis, but GW did and deserved to be canned.

 

3. I was wrong in my initial assumption that TD chose GW to be his administrative assistant because of the great lists and initial contacts GW had made. I assumed that TD feared that then D wunderkind Lewis might take him on and that for whatever reason Fox also made him antsy, but GW could more easily be actively managed. However, where i was mistaken is that rather than managing GW to correct errors, TD instead took a passive-aggressive posture and allowed GW to make his own bed and then made sure he was in a position to hold GW accountable by giving him credit or blame for the team's fate. Ultimately, Bills fans paid for this management strategy as the team was billsfanone to fail badly in GW's first year. Not only was GW allowed to make some obviously horrendous choices in hiring an inexperienced group of assistants, but also cap hell meant that year's team was not going to have a lot of talent. GW ended up wholely weakened in terms of his ability to pull a Cowher even if he wanted to as he had to fire his first OC.

 

4. The internal mechanics we fans aren't privy to also turned out to undercut GW. I like others assumed Kevin Killdrive was a TD choice, but actually TD wanted Clements but "lost" this fight as it became GW making his own bed and making it badly. As it turned out GW ended up powerless to rein in Killdrive's failings because if he stripped Killdrive of power because the O became ineffective it would be an admission that GW had failed twice with OC hiring. Even worse, TD had created a situation in GW's last year by extending all the coaching contracts except a lowball offer to GW that it undercut GW's position. It was clearly not his team. The other change which seemed important for making it clear whose team it was came when GW made a GM-like announcement that Larry Centers would remain a Bill as long as he wanted. A week later Centers got cut. On this type of issue either GW was a liar (unlikely) or simply flat out of the decision-making loop.

 

At any rate, TD has been good or great in virtually every facet of his job from my standpoint. However, the one big failing on his part was his totally screwed up coaching hire of GW. MM seems to be a great improvement, but the faulty GW hiring cost the team 3 years of results.

[nodnarb]

Tom and Tom have done a great job bringing in quality people and quality players. There's no question about it. McGee might be one of the best value gems in years, the Peerless for Willis trade was ballsy and brilliant, Bledsoe gave the team credibility when it desperately needed it, and there haven't been any negative issues or embarrassments. The organization is in good hands.

[San-O]

Let me be first in line to eat a large bowl of crow. The way the Bills are playing now. I thought this guy was as gone as spring. Better renew that contract this off-season.

Donahoe's Future Secured: What a difference two months make. When the Bills were 1-5 it appeared that Tom Donahoe's job may be in jeoparday. The recent surge has caused Ralph Wilson to say that Donahoe can stay in Buffalo indefinitely. Donahoe has also said he wants his job in Buffalo to be his last. His contract runs through the 2005 season but the owner plans on talking to Donahoe in the off season about an extension

159547[/snapback]

 

We are one (1) game over .500 for the first time this season and end up the

season over .500 for the first time in TD's tenure and we are talking contract

extension?

 

I would be ok with this except for his sub-par draft days.

[buffalo mike]

We are one (1) game over .500 for the first time this season and end up the

season over .500 for the first time in TD's tenure and we are talking contract

extension?

 

I would be ok with this except for his sub-par draft days.

159887[/snapback]

Yeah- I know.. There is alot of pain to go with the win streak right now. But some draft picks are starting to look good. The coaching staff seems in place. I personally have been screaming for this guy's head. Just have to give credit where credit is due- and it is due. If I'm TD I ride this wave straight to the bank.

[Campy]

I would be ok with this except for his sub-par draft days.

159887[/snapback]

 

I strongly disagree. Baker, Greer. McGee, McGahee, Kelsay, Evans, Clements, Williams, etc, etc...

[buffalo mike]

 

I strongly disagree.  Baker, Greer. McGee, McGahee, Kelsay, Evans, Clements, Williams, etc, etc...

159921[/snapback]

Shobel.

[San-O]

 

I strongly disagree.  Baker, Greer. McGee, McGahee, Kelsay, Evans, Clements, Williams, etc, etc...

159921[/snapback]

 

Baker? Is he on the roster?

 

Greer?

 

Williams??? Really, 3rd overall who barely starts?

 

Wire?

 

Denny?

 

Reed?

 

In case you haven't noticed, this starting roster after four (4) drafts is made up mostly of FA signings and some players left over from JB. I only see seven (7)

starters out of 22 possible that TD drafted.

 

Not a very good number after four years if you ask me.

[Steven in MD]

I think the Bills are finally playing well, but Ralph is getting senile to say that TD has this job as long as he wants it. Let's say the Bills finish 9-7, a great comeback from 1-5, but still no playoffs. I think I would want to see how he does next season, make sure that the Bills are competitive from the start of the season. Another 1-5 start would doom him in my eyes. He has to prove consistency.

[San-O]

I think the Bills are finally playing well, but Ralph is getting senile to say that TD has this job as long as he wants it.  Let's say the Bills finish 9-7, a great comeback from 1-5, but still no playoffs.  I think I would want to see how he does next season, make sure that the Bills are competitive from the start of the season.  Another 1-5 start would doom him in my eyes.  He has to prove consistency.

160049[/snapback]

 

I agree with you 100%.

 

Maybe Ralphie has started drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

People have been so started for any sign of progress from this team for years

now, that ANY progress is over exagerated.

 

We are a long way away from competing with:

 

New England

Pittsburg

Indy

 

and probably even San Diego.

[ganesh]

I agree with you 100%.

 

Maybe Ralphie has started drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

People have been so started for any sign of progress from this team for years

now, that ANY progress is over exagerated.

 

We are a long way away from competing with:

 

New England

Pittsburg

Indy

 

and probably even San Diego.

160060[/snapback]

Pittsburgh has been 5-11 and 6-10 for the last 2 years....Even though

they have been playing very well (kudos to them) they have had a few

lucky breaks in favor of them here and there...and could easily have been

9-4 instead of 12-1...We cannot be compared with any of those teams

due to the way we started the season....however if you look at the last

10 games, there is not much difference...If pitt had to play NE in NE

with a healthy COrey Dillon the result of that game is completely

different....

 

I think the real elite teams are Indy Phi, and NE...Look at the way they

are manhandling other teams either at home or away....I don't think

Pitt wins if thye have to go to NE.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

We are one (1) game over .500 for the first time this season and end up the

season over .500 for the first time in TD's tenure and we are talking contract

extension?

 

I would be ok with this except for his sub-par draft days.

159887[/snapback]

 

 

As you can see from a couple of the above posts, if you are going to maintain that TD has been subpar in the draft, it should be a relatively straightforward thing to substantiate. However, this accusation has been made with little substantive evidence to back it up and when folks have been called on this, there seems to be little more that they can point to besides Mike Williams' off-season issues and complaints about the 2002 draft. However, MW turning his career around earlier this season does not make him a success yet, but shows why it is intelligent to wait a few years before judguing a draft.

 

Overall, a key to substantiating your complaint is your use of the word "sub-par". Is par set by the rest of the league's performance in picking winners or is par set by your hopes and dreams as fan.

 

If par is a comparison to the rest of the league I have not seen any totally credible estimations of how well teams do at picking contributors from the draft, but TD says 50% of even first round picks disappoint and even if this estimate is on the high side it is uncontroverted by facts. If par is set based on fan hopes then every GM disappoints.

 

To date my sense of his draft is:

 

1. 2001- 5 of 12 picks still on the team. 7 of 12 actually started for the team at some point. 1 Pro Bowl nominee (Henry). 2 likely starters next year (Clements, Schobel), 1 likely starter lost to FA (Jennings), 1 likely reserve (Edwards), 1 likely trade bait (Henry) .

 

Overall, I would say the Bills got value from this draft as slightly more than half the players selected were valuable enough to start (though this says a bit about the poor situation TD inherited and injury as Spoon and Sullivan were supplanted by better players.

 

In order to credibly make the case TD is sub-par as a drafter based on this tear you need to demonstrate that a par performance in the NFL is higher than getting some contribution out of more than 7 or 12 players or yell loudly enough some subjective case.

 

Even the subjecive case would need to count Henry as a bad choice and ignore his Pro Bowl recognition, ignore his rushing yardage gained for the Bills, and discount the value of any return we get for trading him and the good for the Bills mercenary job TD did in extending him. Further, a subjective attack weould need to blame TD for the market economics of the game assuming Jennings leaves.

 

I think the most rational negative assessment that can be made of TDs work here us that he did not find a gem on the second day of the draft. True, but if he did it would be a measure of greatness rather than the failure to find this needle in the haystack meaning he has failed. This is particularly true that he did at least find two players who started for us on day 2 though neither was good enough to stick once we escaped cap hell.

 

2. 2002- Reasonably judged TDs worst draft as there are no NFL stars here (yet?). However, 7 of the 10 players selected are still with the team though all but MW are reserves. Of these players Bannan and Thomas have contributed to this team along with MW as position players. Reed is disappointing but his production his first year makes it too early to give up on him but he must produce from the word go in his next camp. Denney from my view is a pure financing question, He is not worth more than the 455K he is paid annually, but at that pay level (and lower earlier) he did contribute as a starter on a D which was highly ranked in the league last year. TD reached to move up to get him but our need at DL as GW shifted us to a 4-3 from a 3-4 at the same time we were losing Wiley to FA, Hansen to retirement and Big Ted and BS as cap csualties. To make matters tougher picking a tackle at #4 was a no-brainer and picking up Reed who was not expected to be there gave us the ability to trade PP away which turned into the pick which brought McGahee here. Wire clearly has disappointed as a position playetr, but given that ST is one of the things which makes this team special now and Wire has been a contributor here with his tackles and turnovers recoveries coming here. again it strikes me as foolhardy to declare him a total bust. As far as Wire, I'm inclined to fault GW more for having to push him to start (which he is not good enough to do) because they screwed up the Jenkins pick instead of training him to be an ST contributor from the start as they should have done.

 

The other thing worth noting about the 2002 draft is that TD began showing his willingness to trade future draft picks for value today. Say what you want about Bledsoe overall, but clearly trading the 2003 pick on the second day of the 2002 draft provided value for us that year as Bledsoe made the Pro Bowl and was aan important part of getting this region excited about football after a 3-13 season.

 

The jury is still out for another year in terms of accurately assessing this draft. Someone will have to breakout to make this a plus draft. Though not likely, MW's improved play, Reed's first year production and a bunch of guys hanging around and contributing to the team in spots (Wire, Bannan. Denney) makes this possible.

 

2003- All signs point to this being TDs best draft so far. 3 of the 8 players are starters (WM, Kelsay, McGee) and 2 are performing at the very top of the NFL game at RB and KR. All 8 are still with the team Sape and Sobieski with the practice squad. Crowell and Haggan are clearly mainstays on a very productive ST and even Aiken chips in there and is a credible position back-up as well to the tune that they decided his play allowed them to deep 6 Shaw.

 

2004- 6 players drafted and of course all six are still on the team. Evans looks like a real keeper who frees the team up to deal with Moulds based on our interests. Losman remains our QB of the future and Fast Freddy Smith is a mercuric difference maker. Euhus also was a contributor before his injury. McFarland and Anderson have at least suited up to make appearances this year and again its way too early to assess but signs look very good.

 

In essene by my analysis, calling TD a sub-par drafter is not warranted by reality. 2001 was at least par and was actually very good for the Bills at the time and right away amd in terms of the future should produce 2 long-term Bills from the 7 rounds of drafting. 2002 may reasonably be judged as below par as it will likely produce 1 long-term Bill unless one of Denney, Bannan, Wire or Reed steps in a way I don't expect them to. 2003 looks like a great year so far with at least 2 if not 3 players becoming long-term Bills from the 7th round and 2 already threatening to rewrite the record books. 2004 is way to early to tell but the prospects look as good as 2003 in terms of production.

 

What facts make a difference to you in terms of declaring TD a sub-par drafter?

[San-O]

As you can see from a couple of the above posts, if you are going to maintain that TD has been subpar in the draft, it should be a relatively straightforward thing to substantiate.  However, this accusation has been made with little substantive evidence to back it up and when folks have been called on this, there seems to be little more that they can point to besides Mike Williams' off-season issues and complaints about the 2002 draft.  However, MW turning his career around earlier this season does not make him a success yet, but shows why it is intelligent to wait a few years before judguing a draft.

 

Overall, a key to substantiating your complaint is your use of the word "sub-par".  Is par set by the rest of the league's performance in picking winners or is par set by your hopes and dreams as fan.

 

If par is a comparison to the rest of the league I have not seen any totally credible estimations of how well teams do at picking contributors from the draft, but TD says 50% of even first round picks disappoint and even if this estimate is on the high side it is uncontroverted by facts.  If par is set based on fan hopes then every GM disappoints.

 

To date my sense of his draft is:

 

1. 2001- 5 of 12 picks still on the team. 7 of 12 actually started for the team at some point.  1 Pro Bowl nominee (Henry). 2 likely starters next year (Clements, Schobel), 1 likely starter lost to FA (Jennings), 1 likely reserve (Edwards), 1 likely trade bait (Henry) .

 

Overall, I would say the Bills got value from this draft as slightly more than half the players selected were valuable enough to start (though this says a bit about the poor situation TD inherited and injury as Spoon and Sullivan were supplanted by better players. 

 

In order to credibly make the case TD is sub-par as a drafter based on this tear you need to demonstrate that a par performance in the NFL is higher than getting some contribution out of more than 7 or 12 players or yell loudly enough some subjective case.

 

Even the subjecive case would need to count Henry as a bad choice and ignore his Pro Bowl recognition, ignore his rushing yardage gained for the Bills, and discount the value of any return we get for trading him and the good for the Bills mercenary job TD did in extending him. Further, a subjective attack weould need to blame TD for the market economics of the game assuming Jennings leaves.

 

I think the most rational negative assessment that can be made of TDs work here us that he did not find a gem on the second day of the draft.  True, but if he did it would be a measure of greatness rather than the failure to find this needle in the haystack meaning he has failed.  This is particularly true that he did at least find two players who started for us on day 2 though neither was good enough to stick once we escaped cap hell.

 

2. 2002- Reasonably judged TDs worst draft as there are no NFL stars here (yet?).  However, 7 of the 10 players selected are still with the team though all but MW are reserves.  Of these players Bannan and Thomas have contributed to this team along with MW as position players.  Reed is disappointing but his production his first year makes it too early to give up on him but he must produce from the word go in his next camp.  Denney from my view is a pure financing question,  He is not worth more than the 455K he is paid annually, but at that pay level (and lower earlier) he did contribute as a starter on a D which was highly ranked in the league last year.  TD reached to move up to get him but our need at DL as GW shifted us to a 4-3 from a 3-4 at the same time we were losing Wiley to FA, Hansen to retirement and Big Ted and BS as cap csualties.  To make matters tougher picking a tackle at #4 was a no-brainer and picking up Reed who was not expected to be there gave us the ability to trade PP away which turned into the pick which brought McGahee here.  Wire clearly has disappointed as a position playetr, but given that ST is one of the things which makes this team special now and Wire has been a contributor here with his tackles and turnovers recoveries coming here. again it strikes me as foolhardy to declare him a total bust.  As far as Wire, I'm inclined to fault GW more for having to push him to start (which he is not good enough to do) because they screwed up the Jenkins pick instead of training him to be an ST contributor from the start as they should have done.

         

    The other thing worth noting about the 2002 draft is that TD began showing his willingness to trade future draft picks for value today. Say what you want about Bledsoe overall, but clearly trading the 2003 pick on the second day of the 2002 draft provided value for us that year as Bledsoe made the Pro Bowl and was aan important part of getting this region excited about football after a 3-13 season.

 

The jury is still out for another year in terms of accurately assessing this draft.  Someone will have to breakout to make this a plus draft.  Though not likely, MW's improved play, Reed's first year production and a bunch of guys hanging around and contributing to the team in spots (Wire, Bannan. Denney) makes this possible.

 

2003- All signs point to this being TDs best draft so far.  3 of the 8 players are starters (WM, Kelsay, McGee) and 2 are performing at the very top of the NFL game at RB and KR.  All 8 are still with the team Sape and Sobieski with the practice squad. Crowell and Haggan are clearly mainstays on a very productive ST and even Aiken chips in there and is a credible position back-up as well to the tune that they decided his play allowed them to deep 6 Shaw.

 

2004- 6 players drafted and of course all six are still on the team.  Evans looks like a real keeper who frees the team up to deal with Moulds based on our interests.  Losman remains our QB of the future and Fast Freddy Smith is a mercuric difference maker.  Euhus also was a contributor before his injury. McFarland and Anderson have at least suited up to make appearances this year and again its way too early to assess but signs look very good.

 

In essene by my analysis, calling TD a sub-par drafter is not warranted by reality.  2001 was at least par and was actually very good for the Bills at the time and right away amd in terms of the future should produce 2 long-term Bills from the 7 rounds of drafting.  2002 may reasonably be judged as below par as it will likely produce 1 long-term Bill unless one of Denney, Bannan, Wire or Reed steps in a way I don't expect them to.  2003 looks like a great year so far with at least 2 if not 3 players becoming long-term Bills from the 7th round and 2 already threatening to rewrite the record books.  2004 is way to early to tell but the prospects look as good as 2003 in terms of production.

 

What facts make a difference to you in terms of declaring TD a sub-par drafter?

160212[/snapback]

 

 

The way I have seen pro analysts attempt to do this is weigh the round and selection in the round the player was drafted, 2nd round pick 15 for example,

and them make an assessment as to his performanace after year 1,2 and 3.

 

A top five player should be getting Pro Bowl votes.

 

Players drafted in rounds 1 - 2 should all be starters.

 

Players drafted in round 3 should be contributing and seeing significant playing time.

 

And so on.

 

This is oversimplified as I state it.

 

We've had a lot of high 1st round picks to use, don't see any ProBowlers?

[Alaska Darin]

The way I have seen pro analysts attempt to do this is weigh the round and selection in the round the player was drafted, 2nd round pick 15 for example,

and them make an assessment as to his performanace after year 1,2 and 3.

 

A top five player should be getting Pro Bowl votes.

 

Players drafted in rounds 1 - 2 should all be starters.

 

Players drafted in round 3 should be contributing and seeing significant playing time. 

 

And so on.

 

This is oversimplified as I state it.

 

We've had a lot of high 1st round picks to use, don't see any ProBowlers?

160324[/snapback]

Pro Bowlers don't get picked from teams that finish 3-13 and 6-10.

 

There isn't one GM in the NFL that's living up to the standard you're setting.

[todd]

We are one (1) game over .500 for the first time this season and end up the

season over .500 for the first time in TD's tenure and we are talking contract

extension?

 

I would be ok with this except for his sub-par draft days.

159887[/snapback]

 

Donahoe has drafted DAMN well. No friggin GM hits on every single player. It just doesn't happen. Sure, you want everyone to pan out, but it's impossible. Not only that, if you hit on every draft, your newer players are forcing out older ones that you drafted so statistically it's impossible to judge a draft only by how many players remain on your roster.

 

I think TD is one of the best on draft day in the NFL. I submit to you:

1. Evans - contributes right off.

2. McGee - great pickup. Gonna go to the pro-Bowl.

3. Henry - we got a few years of great production which is wonderful for a 2nd round RB. Additionally, we'll most likely get that pick back because ...

4. McGahee - how can you not like this pick?

5. Clements - great player.

6. Wire - ST demon. Worth his draft position.

7. Jennings.

8. Schobel.

 

I'm sorry dude, but Donahoe has done a great job drafting. That's a fact.