Alaska Darin Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 when i talk about locking up young players i talk about locking them up EARLY, on their rookie deals and ideally with 1 to 2 years left on that contract.......the majority of the players you offered we're out of that range.......reading comprehension apparantly isn't your strongpoint....... 226749[/snapback] I'm not reading anymore of your post after this paragraph, nor will I waste anymore time on your cluelessness. EVERY player of the 13 younger than 28 was a free agent from their initial contract/team and fits the age range that Nate Clements is at. EVERY ONE. It doesn't surprise me that you can't grasp this nuance, even though it is EXTREMELY obvious.
d_wag Posted February 3, 2005 Author Posted February 3, 2005 I'm not reading anymore of your post after this paragraph, nor will I waste anymore time on your cluelessness. EVERY player of the 13 younger than 28 was a free agent from their initial contract/team and fits the age range that Nate Clements is at. EVERY ONE. It doesn't surprise me that you can't grasp this nuance, even though it is EXTREMELY obvious. 226795[/snapback] i'm sure you didn't read the rest of the post......haha......it's cool man, i don't blame you for running away with your tail between your legs, seeing i brushed off every one of your little "challenges" and weak points....but hey, if you want to continue your unusual "TD can do no wrong" man-love for the guy, be my guest........
34-78-83 Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 d wag, Alaska is absolutley right about TD and the Steelers. It was widely known that it was the ownership, not GM and Player personnell who was unwilling to pay top dollar to retain players, so they merely relied on TD's abilities to consistently find talent to replace the guys that were leaving. I (unfortunately) have all too many friends who are diehard Steeler fans and they would attest to this. Most of them also comment from time to time about how they hated to see TD go. The reason he isn't still in Pitt is because of of one man, Bill Cowher. Their power struggle over Kordell Stewart (Cowher supported him, TD did not) was the beginning of the end for TD in Pitt.
Rico Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 I can't find much fault at all with the way TD has managed our roster. Almost every move he's made has looked great on paper: some have worked out (eg. TKO, Fletcher), some haven't (eg. GW, Drew), but no GM is perfect. I've been very glad to see the players that have left town (eg. AW & Ruben) leave, they have not been missed. He was smart not to extend JJ before this year, as JJ was coming off an injury-filled, mediocre 2003 season. He may have played better this year, but I'm still not convinced he is the answer at LT... let him leave if he wants too much $$$. As for Nate, I look for TD to extend him this off-season. Unlike the under-achieving AW, Nate has delivered and is now one of the best CBs in the game... and he still has upside. No way TD lets his first #1 pick with the Bills leave, he will pay him what he's worth.
34-78-83 Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 I can't find much fault at all with the way TD has managed our roster.Almost every move he's made has looked great on paper: some have worked out (eg. TKO, Fletcher), some haven't (eg. GW, Drew), but no GM is perfect. I've been very glad to see the players that have left town (eg. AW & Ruben) leave, they have not been missed. He was smart not to extend JJ before this year, as JJ was coming off an injury-filled, mediocre 2003 season. He may have played better this year, but I'm still not convinced he is the answer at LT... let him leave if he wants too much $$$. As for Nate, I look for TD to extend him this off-season. Unlike the under-achieving AW, Nate has delivered and is now one of the best CBs in the game... and he still has upside. No way TD lets his first #1 pick with the Bills leave, he will pay him what he's worth. 227041[/snapback] I'd agree with all of that Rico. Good point about JJ too. He needed to prove that he could maintain his level of play and make it through a season healthy. Well of course his play was fine, and he almost made it all the way through healthy
Rico Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 I'd agree with all of that Rico. Good point about JJ too. He needed to prove that he could maintain his level of play and make it through a season healthy. Well of course his play was fine, and he almost made it all the way through healthy 227050[/snapback] Some people have a very short memory as to how brutal the 2003 season was. I was being very kind when I said JJ was mediocre. The only 2 players that I would've considered giving a raise to were Moorman & TH. I still questioned extending Schobel before this season, though in retrospect it looks to be a very good move by TD.
FTW_BillsFan Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 Some people have a very short memory as to how brutal the 2003 season was. I was being very kind when I said JJ was mediocre. The only 2 players that I would've considered giving a raise to were Moorman & TH. I still questioned extending Schobel before this season, though in retrospect it looks to be a very good move by TD. 227062[/snapback] We need to hook Moorman up w/ a lifetime deal. Then get Nugent in here and our Special Teams will be stellar for the next 5 years.
Alaska Darin Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 d wag, Alaska is absolutley right about TD and the Steelers. It was widely known that it was the ownership, not GM and Player personnell who was unwilling to pay top dollar to retain players, so they merely relied on TD's abilities to consistently find talent to replace the guys that were leaving. I (unfortunately) have all too many friends who are diehard Steeler fans and they would attest to this. Most of them also comment from time to time about how they hated to see TD go. The reason he isn't still in Pitt is because of of one man, Bill Cowher. Their power struggle over Kordell Stewart (Cowher supported him, TD did not) was the beginning of the end for TD in Pitt. 227028[/snapback] Oh stop it with facts. Everyone knows it's all about "man love" and that I left with my "tail between my legs."
soljc Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 I can't find much fault at all with the way TD has managed our roster. 227041[/snapback] I can. Lindell, Posey and Shaw are but a few of the poor decisions with regard to free agents, but then again, signing a free agent who works out doesn't deserve high praise in my book since these guys have already proven they can play. His draft selection of talent has been average, at best.
Rico Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 I can. Lindell, Posey and Shaw are but a few of the poor decisions with regard to free agents, but then again, signing a free agent who works out doesn't deserve high praise in my book since these guys have already proven they can play. His draft selection of talent has been average, at best. 227254[/snapback] Re: draft selection,I would've agreed with you before this past season, but MW, Kelsay, & McGee all stepped up, and Willis & Evans proved to be steals. Add some very nice undrafted FA signings like Baker & Greer, & I feel a lot better about the young talent. As for free agents, I agree Lindell was a mistake, but he didn't exactly break the bank for Posey & Shaw. Arguably his biggest mistake was extending Drew last year, but I've got a hunch Ralph forced his hand there. All in all, I'm very happy with the job TD has done.
Yoho Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 I can. Lindell, Posey and Shaw are but a few of the poor decisions with regard to free agents, but then again, signing a free agent who works out doesn't deserve high praise in my book since these guys have already proven they can play. His draft selection of talent has been average, at best. 227254[/snapback] Wow, that is an amazing post. According to this post, all free agent signings work out because players have succeeded in the past. I could probably list 10 all-pro players that turned out to be complete busts as free agents, but I guess that doesn't really happen. Notably, Donohoe has not signed a single one of them. There may be some legitimate criticisms of Donohoe but let's not just be silly.
Alaska Darin Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 Wow, that is an amazing post. According to this post, all free agent signings work out because players have succeeded in the past. I could probably list 10 all-pro players that turned out to be complete busts as free agents, but I guess that doesn't really happen. Notably, Donohoe has not signed a single one of them. There may be some legitimate criticisms of Donohoe but let's not just be silly. 227277[/snapback] Peerless Price? Alvin Harper? Jeremiah Trotter? Hugh Douglas? Sorry folks, you just can't have it both ways. Donahoe has done a good job getting players to Buffalo and putting asses in seats. He made an honest mistake with his first head coach but his second is looking good at this point.
34-78-83 Posted February 3, 2005 Posted February 3, 2005 I can. Lindell, Posey and Shaw are but a few of the poor decisions with regard to free agents, but then again, signing a free agent who works out doesn't deserve high praise in my book since these guys have already proven they can play. His draft selection of talent has been average, at best. 227254[/snapback] How in the world could Posey and Shaw be considered mistakes when Posey is at the lower end of the pay scale and atleast plays consistently and doesn't hurt the defense, and Shaw came in for peanuts as well and led the team in receptions in 2003? I'll give you Lindell....
Recommended Posts