Campy Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 And there would be an equal outpouring of criticism for signing a guy to a bad contract which would help gut the team after this year. 277922[/snapback] Oh, no doubt. I try not to get too wound up over the offseason FA moves, or the lack of them. I trust that the brass at OBD knows a lot more about players' value and projected roles with the team than I do. It's also safe to say they have a better idea how much cap money they have and how much they anticipate spending on draft picks and UDFAs than I do. With all that being said, I find it interesting the way we fans talk-up players while Bflo is courting them, and then dog them when they sign elsewhere. d_wag's right in that if DeMulling was signed by a Bflo, an awful lot of us that are finding things wrong with him would be finding things right with him.
Typical TBD Guy Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 I actually have to disagree with you on this one, d_wag. Even if TD did lowball DeMulling, that might have been a good move on TD's part. IMO, DeMulling is an overrated guard who's not even worth that two year contract Detroit gave him. He benefited immensely from those around him in Indyland - LT Tarik Glenn, C Jeff Saturday, and of course QB Peyton Manning. I'm not sure DeMulling would be as successful with Teague and Tucker flanking him, or with having to block for a first year starting QB. Plus, he's no standout in the run blocking department, which should be the bare minimum requirement for a starting lineman on this offense. There are better (and cheaper) LG options still out there for our offense. I'll name one right now: Bennie Anderson, UFA from the Ravens. He'd be perfect for us. But I am still with you on this larger "TD is an overrated GM" argument.
d_wag Posted March 17, 2005 Author Posted March 17, 2005 And there would be an equal outpouring of criticism for signing a guy to a bad contract which would help gut the team after this year. 277922[/snapback] yea, there would really be hell to pay if TD signed demulling to that deal......... just imagine -- TD signs him for 2 years to that money and i make a post saying "what a horrible deal - he won't be here long enough to make a difference and will just hurt us in the '06 offseason when all our free agents come up -- stupid TD!".........yea, i'm sure that would be met with tons of agreeance, and i'm sure you would be the first one stepping up to say how right i am........ so hypocritical.........DET made a good deal and you'd all be pleased as punch if TD had got demulling in here for that money for that term........there would be no criticism and your comment is just foolish.........
GG Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 with free agent dollars, that can accomplished........are you even aware of who is up that year? I didn't know you were married to one of the Wilson daughters and can be so carefree with the spending. Care to compute the amounts of signing bonuses that will have to be paid out to replace about 7 starters in key posititions in free agency? what is this crusade anyway? if TD signed the guy to that money and improved the LG position, i would give him credit.......he didn't, so i call him out........ It's a crusade because of your one track line of posting of TD passing on every name free agent that comes through the carousel. It's a crusade for calling him out for failing to sign a middling LT to a top notch contract, for failing to get into bidding wars for other free agents whose talents can be paralleled by regular street free agents and trying to keep some sense of roster stability. Other than your obvious breadth of knowledge of offensive lines, please tell me exactly how much better Demulling is over Mike Gandy. Please include analysis of footwork, drive push, and pull out ability. when does your crusade end? the one that revolves around agreeing with every move TD makes........ No, my "crusade" does not include agreeing with everything that TD does. But my crusade also recognizes that there are 31 other GMs in this league, and that if history has proven one thing during the age of free agency, you are far more successful in pursuing a New England model than you are a Danny Snyder model. If you want to win the spring free agent sweepstakes, you may be better served following Boy Danny's team. what's Webster say is the defintion of "mistake"? is it passing on kendall when he would have improved the LG position dramatically? 277920[/snapback] A definition of "mistake" is different than "ignore." You may want to use the right word next time you try to prove a point.
d_wag Posted March 17, 2005 Author Posted March 17, 2005 There are better (and cheaper) LG options still out there for our offense. I'll name one right now: Bennie Anderson, UFA from the Ravens. He'd be perfect for us. 277929[/snapback] i don't want anderson at all........the guy who replaced him (vincent) would have been a perfect fit for buffalo and the bills had no reported interest in him, so i don't expect to hear buffalo and anderson connected..........
bobblehead Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 Buffalo line. " 5 big slow fat guys backed up by 5 big slow fat guys" 277891[/snapback] Teague is not fat and slow. Neither is Tucker. Those would be the two exceptions to the large lineman tendency. Williams is big and fat, but relatively not slow.
LabattBlue Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 Teague is not fat and slow. Neither is Tucker. Those would be the two exceptions to the large lineman tendency. Williams is big and fat, but relatively not slow. 277950[/snapback] Make that avatar go away....PLEASE!!!!
ajzepp Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 dwag, you can continue to go on about how we should respect your 'opinion', yet you are offering anything BUT an opinion. What you are doing is making accusations and assumptions, about which you have absolutely no clue. On top of that, they are the same tired, ignorant, and downright annoying assumptions that you've been promulgating over and over the past few weeks. All you've done is changed the names based on which player TD didn't sign. Find a new dead horse to beat.
bobblehead Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 Make that avatar go away....PLEASE!!!! 277955[/snapback] You will have to take that up with Mr. Tuesday.
Stussy109 Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 Where'd you get that Salary Cap info? I've never seen such a low figure. 277718[/snapback] Buffalo News, We are much lower than anticipated due to some Contract escalators in Mike WIlliams Contract, Coy Wire's Contract, and soem other bonuses. Now that I am remembering, I remember Willis had a lot of escalators in his contract. Watch out for his cap figure in the future.
ndirish1978 Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 conspiracy theories! You know its pretty easy to criticize without offering any viable options. I can sit back and say, look there's a problem here and maybe something could have been done to maybe fix it but it wasnt! Come on! I enjoy knowing what they paid for the guy, but hold our doomsday commentary for another time. Its St Patrick's day, get sloshed and argue with the toilet. WOOHOO. Thats what im doing.
Campy Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 My unsolicited opine: The difficulty with assigning blame on why DeMulling didn't sign with Buffalo is that it may very well have had nothing to do with TD or money. In fact, it's entirely possible that Bflo's offer was for more money. Perhaps DeMulling likes the idea of playing at least 8 games a season in a dome. Or maybe he and his wife agreed that by playing in Detroit he wouldn't have to sell his house and uproot his family since Detroit's much closer to Indy than Bflo is. My point being, unless or until we learn WHY DeMulling didn't sign with Bflo, all arguments one way or the other are moot, aren't they?
d_wag Posted March 17, 2005 Author Posted March 17, 2005 I didn't know you were married to one of the Wilson daughters and can be so carefree with the spending. Care to compute the amounts of signing bonuses that will have to be paid out to replace about 7 starters in key posititions in free agency? i sincerely doubt we will have to replace 7 starters in the '06 off-season with free agents........we have two drafts to prepare, not to mention current backups on the roster who may be ready to step in to starting roles at that point.........you still haven't listed the potential free agents........ It's a crusade because of your one track line of posting of TD passing on every name free agent that comes through the carousel. It's a crusade for calling him out for failing to sign a middling LT to a top notch contract, for failing to get into bidding wars for other free agents whose talents can be paralleled by regular street free agents and trying to keep some sense of roster stability. since when is kendrick vincent a name free agent? and are you really comparing demulling to a street free agent? Other than your obvious breadth of knowledge of offensive lines, please tell me exactly how much better Demulling is over Mike Gandy. Please include analysis of footwork, drive push, and pull out ability. it's not worth the hassle when all you'll do is disagree, no matter how i breakdown someone's play........when it comes to OL, it's all opinion and very subjective, and you will just offer your own opinion which is based on your crusade to defend every move (or non-move) TD makes........i can point out that many scouts felt he was playing at a pro-bowl level before his injury, but what is the good of it when your just going to make over the top remarks like comparing him to a street free agent? No, my "crusade" does not include agreeing with everything that TD does. But my crusade also recognizes that there are 31 other GMs in this league, and that if history has proven one thing during the age of free agency, you are far more successful in pursuing a New England model than you are a Danny Snyder model. paying a very good guard 2.2M follows the NE model if you ask me........overpaying for a "randy thomas" type guard follows the danny snyder model........ If you want to win the spring free agent sweepstakes, you may be better served following Boy Danny's team. i want to see positions of need upgrading at a reasonable cost........signing demulling would have accomplished that goal......... A definition of "mistake" is different than "ignore." You may want to use the right word next time you try to prove a point. and you might want to address the fact that TD made a "mistake" by not pursuing kendall last year.........
ajzepp Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 My unsolicited opine: The difficulty with assigning blame on why DeMulling didn't sign with Buffalo is that it may very well have had nothing to do with TD or money. In fact, it's entirely possible that Bflo's offer was for more money. Perhaps DeMulling likes the idea of playing at least 8 games a season in a dome. Or maybe he and his wife agreed that by playing in Detroit he wouldn't have to sell his house and uproot his family since Detroit's much closer to Indy than Bflo is. My point being, unless or until we learn WHY DeMulling didn't sign with Bflo, all arguments one way or the other are moot, aren't they? 277968[/snapback] That's the point dwag is clueless on. He just assumes he knows what the reasons were and then tries to convince people it's just his 'opinion'. He could leave it alone at pointless speculation, but he feels the need to continue with the assumptions about TD and the rest of the Bills staff.
LabattBlue Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 There are some people who like to argue for the sake of arguing. Their only goal seems to be one of getting the last word in(or the last post in).
Mark VI Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 I'm certainly not going to defend TD blindly. He's made his mistakes. But the whole premise of this thread is that 2-3 UFA name players on the OL market were the only available answers to our problems. Now that DeMulling is gone, we are settling for B or C Level players who don't have name recognition. I'm not willing to accept that as the final or "right" answer. There seems to be an overwhelming presumption that TD is some madman control freak who leaves the rest of the front office and coaching staff out of personnel decisions, due to his "mis-management" of the cap. On the one hand, people are questioning why we don't have more room available to sign UFA's. Then these same people state we should have offered Jennings,Williams and other teams FA's, huge " market value ' contracts ? Sorry but you can't play both ends of the issue. You either throw $$ at everyone recklessly and mortgage the immediate future or work within your guidelines, offering long term $$ to a certain core of players ( as dictated by the cap ). The Bills had direct meetings with Womack and DeMulling. The presumption is that both were offered contracts and other teams outbid the Bills. I have yet to see any evidence of this, other than press speculation. TD - " Our process on the free agent visits is very detailed. It is coordinated by John Guy and our player personnel staff. Included in the visit is a thorough physical exam and a visit with the coaches, particularly the coordinators and coach Mularkey. Our position coach for the free agent that is visiting will watch film with him and they will explain what we are trying to do with regard to our styles of play and our system. The contractual aspect with the free agents visits is really not something that we get into in any detail with the player. This is something that we would approach the agent with after the visit has been completed. " So in closing, I'm not ready to declare the Free Agency period a disaster ( after 2 weeks ) by any stretch. I could see the limited cap and know a few other choices remain for the OL. The Draft could produce a starter in round 2 but I'll wait until Sept. to press the panic button. That's 6 months away and lots can happen between now and then. Lack of patience can produce some very biased, bitter views with little room for debate.
Navy Chief Navy Pride Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 My unsolicited opine: The difficulty with assigning blame on why DeMulling didn't sign with Buffalo is that it may very well have had nothing to do with TD or money. In fact, it's entirely possible that Bflo's offer was for more money. Perhaps DeMulling likes the idea of playing at least 8 games a season in a dome. Or maybe he and his wife agreed that by playing in Detroit he wouldn't have to sell his house and uproot his family since Detroit's much closer to Indy than Bflo is. My point being, unless or until we learn WHY DeMulling didn't sign with Bflo, all arguments one way or the other are moot, aren't they? 277968[/snapback] Good Point
d_wag Posted March 17, 2005 Author Posted March 17, 2005 dwag, you can continue to go on about how we should respect your 'opinion', yet you are offering anything BUT an opinion. What you are doing is making accusations and assumptions, about which you have absolutely no clue. On top of that, they are the same tired, ignorant, and downright annoying assumptions that you've been promulgating over and over the past few weeks. All you've done is changed the names based on which player TD didn't sign. Find a new dead horse to beat. 277957[/snapback] my "opinion" is that TD lowballs..........you don't have to agree, but i am well within my rights to express that "opinion", just like you are well within your rights to agree with every single move he makes .......my "opinion" is he lowballed demulling and wasn't willing to pay what DET ended up paying, which was extremely reasonable in my "opinion".......your "opinion" is he made the right move (as always) and that likely it was more demulling fault and not TD's if he did want him (just like it's usually the players fault and not TD's)........ i listen to you guys drone on in support of TD, which i would consider a "dead horse", so your going to have to put up with me when he misses out on a guy who would have been a big upgrade at our LG spot who signed a very reasonable contract.........if you don't like it, don't read my threads or my posts........very simple..........
Mike in Syracuse Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 I heard someone on sports radio the other day and they were addressing this issue of free agency. The guy being interviewed made the following statement: "Outside of the rare exception, guys like TO, free agent signings often hurt the team who lost the player more than the help the team who signed the player" I think he was spot on. Throwing money a people just because they are a free agent is flat out stupid. If Demulling isn't any better than Tucker then why should we sign him? It's also interesting how our former players like Prioleau and Jay Riemersma are viewed as other peoples treasure. Until after two seasons they flame out and are cut by their new team. Anyone remember Nate Odom's? Thomas Smith? Jeff Burris? Peerless Price? Ruben Brown?
CoachChuckDickerson Posted March 17, 2005 Posted March 17, 2005 i listen to you guys drone on in support of TD, which i would consider a "dead horse", so your going to have to put up with me when he misses out on a guy who would have been a big upgrade at our LG spot who signed a very reasonable contract.........if you don't like it, don't read my threads or my posts........very simple.......... 278013[/snapback] Number one he is not a BIG upgrade. There are many teams with offensive line woes. Why were they not hot for Demulling if he is such as stud. If 2 million was such a deal where were the Packers who lost both guards? Number two, if you don't like people dogging you for it. Don't post.....very simple.....
Recommended Posts