With Buffalo Seemingly Desperate for a LT

[San-O]

Here's my short take on MW, was the pick bad? Yes, but it could of been worse at least he's a starter and isn't Tony Mandarich ie out of the league.

374241[/snapback]

 

 

OK, I'll buy that. Do you think they'll redo his contract? I mean REALLY redo it.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

i've said it before and i'll say it again.  McNally coaching our OLine is like putting General Patton in charge of the French Army*

 

*translation for the HotPockets® crowd who may not know who General Patton is:  its like putting that guy from Hells Kitchen in charge of a McDonalds

374172[/snapback]

 

I think the point of disagreement is that while I like Dusty Ziegler as a player having him be your starter at C and Glenn Parker be your starter at LT meant that when JMac took this crew to the SB they seemed closer to being the football equivalent of the French Army than being an SB group.

 

Likewise JMac took over an OL crew last year for the Bills which had all the makings of being a turnstile and trained and turned these moderate at best to poor performing players and turned them into a squad which cut the sacks of Bledsoe in half and did some great run blocking for WM.

 

JMac has demonstrated the ability with last year's Bills, NYG's SB team and throughout his career of getting production out of so-so talents,

 

If the OL is the football equivalent of the French Army you want Patton in charge rather than (take your picks of whomever you want to name) rather than have some general in charge who loses battles with good or bad armies.

 

If you are saying you've give up hope on any reasonable performance being squeezed out of the Bills OL players then say so and the rest of us fan will root for them to do well.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

OK, I'll buy that.  Do you think they'll redo his contract?  I mean REALLY redo it.

374242[/snapback]

 

The only redo of MW's contract will be a restructuring which pushes bases alary into bonus so it can be prorated over the life of his contract to lower his cap hit.

 

I think the Bills did not make a mistake in the 2002 draft where they picked MW that virtually any team in the Bills position would have made in this draft.

 

1, The argument which seems to be made more frequently and carries more weight is that rather than passing on taking an LT with their #4 that year, that the Bills have actually not done enough drafting of OL players.

 

2. Given that they really needed to get an OL player who would immediately start for this team on the OL, the Bills really had a choice between taking MW or McKinnie. I think they made the right choice here even with the MW meltdown prior to last season.

 

3. Did the Bills make a mistake in the amount they paid MW? NO. The contract amount was basically determined by the slot he was taken in the draft. Thoough there is variation in the deal and that of other draftees it is not in the amound he is paid but in the distribution of this amount over the years of the contract pm base versus bonus.

 

4. Did TD make a mistake in the distribution he agreed to? YES, Howerver, this mistake appears minor in terms of its immediate effects on our cap and may even turn out to be a mistake if MW keeps developing like he was from the start of last season through the end.

 

TD's mistake appears not to be the complaint many are making in this thread that MW is overpaid (yes he is, but then all NFL players are overpaid since they are getting a bunch of money to play a game and if instead you ask is he being overpaid for a player drafted where he was the answer is no since he is slotted at that amount. One can judge him based on whether he has produced as a #4 the answer I think is yes iniitally, no his second year as he was asked to really carry Pacillo when he still needed to be taught and Ruel did not do this well in addition. His third year was a mixed bag as he melted down in off-season but shaped up nicely under the prodding and teaching of JMac. There is some legit hope based on his improvement last year and also his off-season commitment shown in his weight and comments (though biased) by the Bills braintrust.

 

The mistake appears to be that based on nis cap hit he certainly is being paid based on what the market is giving to LTs rather than a lesser amount the market is giving to RTs. TD either planned for him to make the jump in sides or to do what he did and find an LT he felt could play at well below the LT market rate. We will see how this plan B works out this season.

 

The other factor that should be noted in your argument is that though MW is overpaid based on his output (his current cap hit as researched by Clumpy puts him at a level which would have been a top 5 OL cap hit last year the number you quote for his cap hit is not consistent with the best information available on his restructured deal. His cap hit is not the old $9 million number you quote but appears to be lowered to $7.8 nillion. This number is still enormous but it is a real reduction which currently gives the Bills a couple of million below the cap to use if someone suddenly becomes available,

 

Overall, if there is any desperation regarding our LT situation it appears to be from the poster rather than from the Bills and not from me. If the Bills had signed Shelton when they believed he is not good enough, this would be desperate.

 

However, I think the LT situation is more or a concern or perhaps a worry but is not desperate right now because there are credible plan As, B and maybe even a plan C. Maybe one plan will not work and the second plan will create management tremors on the line to be dealt with, but there seems to be little desperation at this point beyond fans who have their panties in a wad.

[Bill from NYC]

I think the point of disagreement is that while I like Dusty Ziegler as a player having him be your starter at C and Glenn Parker be your starter at LT meant that when JMac took this crew to the SB they seemed closer to being the football equivalent of the French Army than being an SB group.

 

Likewise JMac took over an OL crew last year for the Bills which had all the makings of being a turnstile and trained and turned these moderate at best to poor performing players and turned them into a squad which cut the sacks of Bledsoe in half and did some great run blocking for WM.

 

JMac has demonstrated the ability with last year's Bills, NYG's SB team and throughout his career of getting production out of so-so talents,

 

If the OL is the football equivalent of the French Army you want Patton in charge rather than (take your picks of whomever you want to name) rather than have some general in charge who loses battles with good or bad armies.

 

If you are saying you've give up hope on any reasonable performance being squeezed out of the Bills OL players then say so and the rest of us fan will root for them to do well.

374260[/snapback]

 

JMac, as good as he is, does not work miracles each and every year. The lack of talent caught up with that same NJ Giant OL and they promptly collapsed after that fluke superbowl season.

 

TD, as efficient as he is, bombed with the Mike Williams pick. I disagree with others in this thread in that imo, a RT CAN be worth the big bucks if he is a consistently dominant probowl player, something that MW is not, nor will he probably ever be.

 

Frankly, I am against renegotiating his contract unless absolutely necessary. MW is nearing the point where he can be cut (perhaps after 6/1/06) and not hurt the Bills' salary cap all that much. I think this season should should be the last opportunity for MW to "eat" more than 10% of the Bills cap allotment.

 

Since at least 1994, the Bills have neglected the issue of blocking. How many first round picks were used at either OT, OG or OC in more than a decade? I count 2, Ruben Brown (a great pick) and Mike Williams (a not so good pick).

During this time, we have wasted draft picks (Loucheiy, Williams), brought in bad free agents (Panos, Farris), and given HUGE contracts to stumblebums (Fina, Ostroski). It has been a seemingly endless parade of bum after bum, and stiff after stiff.

I had my hopes up this year, and with our 1st pick, TD drafted a 170 lb. guy who isn't big enough to act in an early 60's beach movie with Annette Funicello. They would kick sand in his face and throw him of the set.

 

PS: >>>>>Likewise JMac took over an OL crew last year for the Bills which had all the makings of being a turnstile and trained and turned these moderate at best to poor performing players and turned them into a squad which cut the sacks of Bledsoe in half and did some great run blocking for WM.<<<<<

 

Credit McNally as you will for this sudden turn of events, but it did not occur until the very second that WM walked ON the football field, and Travis Henry schlepped OFF the football field.

[eball]

TD, as efficient as he is, bombed with the Mike Williams pick. I disagree with others in this thread in that imo, a RT CAN be worth the big bucks if he is a consistently dominant probowl player, something that MW is not, nor will he probably ever be.

couldn't disagree more; over the 2nd half of 2004 MW was certainly dominant at his position. all signs point to his continuing that progression in 2005 and beyond.

 

but it did not occur until the very second that WM walked ON the football field, and Travis Henry schlepped OFF the football field.

374290[/snapback]

you said "schlepped."

 

happy 4th.

[Generation ME]

Didn't Mike Williams just take a 2 million plus reduction, bringing his cap figure down to around 6.7,6.8 million ? I believe I read this in about 3 articles in the last week. So the whole 9-10 million rant is moot.

 

McGahee ran to the right most plays last year. Who did he run behind ? Williams, right ? With a little more mobility from the QB position, I'm less worried about LT. Jennings was just average and couldn't stay healthy anyhow. The Bills shouldn't be picking in the top 10 anytime soon so they won't have to overpay a rookie again.

 

Wow. Looking at that list of top 10 picks, I see more lemons than good players. It just shows what a dice roll the draft is. At least our Tackle is starting and making a positive contribution. Many of those players just took a huge salary and didn't do anything.

[Bill from NYC]

Another angle I'm thinking of now:

 

If you DON'T move Williams to LT, does this mean your started $1.25 mill./year

LT is a better lineman than your $9-$10 mill./year right tackle?

 

I think it absolutely does.

374119[/snapback]

 

Not necessarily imo. For instance, on the cowboys of yore, Erik Williams was FAR more dominant that Mark Tunei, yet Tunei played LT; probably because he was more agile.

The problem for the Bills is that Mike Williams is a far cry from Erik, and Gandy is an unproven castoff from a terrible football team.

 

Every good football team needs good blockers. The Bills play their home games in a frequently cold and windy stadium and the need for blocking is amplified. This has not stopped the Bills front office from screwing up the OL year after year.

 

At least TD tries. It was a bold move to give the big bucks to CV, our best lineman. Jennings was fine for a 3rd round pick. It is too bad that Mike Williams was a bust for that draft slot. He would have been adequate for a 2nd or 3rd round pick.

[obie_wan]

So Gandy is the answer?  Interesting.

Then that's another reason I don't like Donahoe.  You are coming off a 3-13 season, and you spend your # 4 overall on a right tackle?

 

That's like saying, we can have anybody in the entire NFL draft with the

exception of the first three picks, and we think a RT is:

 

a)  going to help us more than anybody else available.

 

b)  this right tackle is the best play available.

 

Very wrong on both accounts, IMO.

 

I don't think you take a chance on a guy that high when your team is horrible.

And no, I don't believe there was no other team in the NFL past the first four

would have traded up or we could have traded down with.

 

The other things, they didn't say anything about drafting him to play LT?

 

I wonder why that is?

374126[/snapback]

 

 

 

Teflon Tom fully intended on taking Joey Harrington at #4.

 

When Detroit surprised him, Teflon Tom panicked and took what he thought was the least risky option in Fat Mike.

 

He should have traded down, got an extra pick adn reduced the salary draiin, and took Mike Pearson as LT in round 2 (instead of Josh Reed).

[OBXBILLSFAN]

First, with the recent conversion of MW's signing bonus to a roster bonus, his cap number is now around $7.5 Million, not the $9-10 Million that people are throwing around. Overpaid? Definitely. But not quite to the extent that many think.

 

Second, MW is developing nicely under McNally. If he continues to progress, and is willing to restructure his contract next year, he could be right about where he should be.

 

Third, I have faith that the coaching staff has evaluated film from at least some of Gandy's 30 starts in Chicago - 20 of them at LT - and has determined that he can do a good job at LT. As fans, we should at least give them the benefit of the doubt.

[d_wag]

MW is developing nicely under McNally. If he continues to progress, and is willing to restructure his contract next year, he could be right about where he should be.

 

i think big mike is looking at a big extension next year........restructuring only pushes cap dollars into the future.........with only 2 years on the deal after this season, moving dollars from '06 just means they end up in '07......we are at big mike's mercy in that regard, but an extension would be very good for the bills and would put some more dollars in his pocket........

 

I have faith that the coaching staff has evaluated film from at least some of Gandy's 30 starts in Chicago - 20 of them at LT - and has determined that he can do a good job at LT. As fans, we should at least give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

i would have more faith in the coaching staff if they didn't think the same thing about mike pucillo this time last year.......they determined he could do a good job at LG and they were wrong.......

 

as well, i find it strange that so many fans are quick to jump on jennings because of his injury history but no one seems to bring up the fact that gandy has missed more time over the past 4 years then JJ has.......it's not only a question of whether or not gandy is good, it's also whether he can actually stay on the field..........

[Typical TBD Guy]

I'll add my $0.02 on this debate:

 

1. No way do I think TD & Co. originally drafted Mike Williams to be a RT. What happened was simply that MW didn't have the LT position's necessary foot speed that TD's scouts unfortunately projected for him.

 

2. Arguing that having an overpaid RT is OK as long as you have a cheaper LT is wrong. Starting-caliber RT's are much much easier to find in the NFL than starting-caliber LT's. If you're lucky enough to find a good and cheap LT, then you can still land a good and cheap RT and reserve the extra saved cash for other roster positions.

 

3. I'm not convinced that Mike Williams was a better pick than McKinnie. Maybe McKinnie has had his similar share of growing pains like MW, but at least he plays LT.

 

4. I'm also not convinced that MW can be declared a "bust." He's certainly overpaid for his current productivity, but then again so is Eric Moulds, Troy Vincent, and...yes, even JP Losman. And unlike other 2002 draft picks (Ryan Denney, Josh Reed, Coy Wire), MW has at least been a steady contributing starter with noticeable improvements made each year. While I'd still rather have McKinnie than MW, MW under McNally's tutelage could very well become a Pro Bowl regular at RT. Not bad when you consider the frequency of busts that have been made in the top 10 draft slots over the years (best case example: Cleveland Browns).

[RunTheBall]

There's no question MW was pegged to eventually end up at LT but he developed slower than expected and will remain at RT. Using the retrospectoscope, MW is a bust as the #4 player picked overall so far but that doesn't mean he isn't a solid contributor. I was a big MW detractor at the beginning of the season and he definitely improved in the 2nd half but there's no way you can rate him, as many have, a "dominating" RT based on half a season. IF MW continues to develop and IF he signs a long term cap friendly extension THEN maybe we can look back and say he wasn't that bad of a #4 pick.

 

I thought McKinnie was a turnstile at LT and a bust? Is this not correct?

 

RTB

[stuckincincy]

I had my hopes up this year, and with our 1st pick, TD drafted a 170 lb. guy who isn't big enough to act in an early 60's beach movie with Annette Funicello. They would kick sand in his face and throw him of the set.

 

374290[/snapback]

 

Roscoe is Moondoggie???

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I'll add my $0.02 on this debate:

 

1. No way do I think TD & Co. originally drafted Mike Williams to be a RT. What happened was simply that MW didn't have the LT position's necessary foot speed that TD's scouts unfortunately projected for him.

 

I think the lack of MW footspeed to make the transition to LT was not a misassessment issue in terms of his basic talent (he seems to have the same agility he had as a draftee) but that he lacked footspeed in 2004 after his pre-season meltdown when the Grammy who raised him died and his weight ballooned up.  I think most of us outside observers make an assumption (which has been shown to be false using objective measures like his shuttle-run times and may well be false based on subjective measures like what the coaches think of his game) based on his massive body that he does not have the agility to handle outside rushers.

 

However, from what I see in the real world, MW's problems which are real but manageable, have not been agility or outside rusher issues, but have been mental co-ordination issues as he an Pacillo were not able to get it together at all and we saw some sacks by MWs guys in defensive stunt plays.

 

I am clear and remember MW looking stupidly at Pacillo with Bledsoe laying on the turf with an obvious "I thought you had him" look being shared by MW and Pacillo.  If MW had the agility or outside rush issues that people claim then there would have been constant (rather than near constant) sacs of Bledsoe from the right side.

 

The MW agility concern strikes me as simply a red herring from an analysis which looks only at his size and not at what really happened.  he has work and learning to do but his problems are ones that are linked more to his being a younster and his being overweight last season rather than some fundamental ability issue from what I see. If one judges that he is fundamentally flawed, do you disagree that his problems are linked to his inexperience as a rookie and second year player and deconditioning early last season and how do you explain the things he has done well (he was a very good run-blocker for TH in 2002 and 03 and WM in 04 and his pass pro earned him a gameball by midseason last year and he was a key part of a much improved sack protection of Bledsoe last year.

 

 

2. Arguing that having an overpaid RT is OK as long as you have a cheaper LT is wrong. Starting-caliber RT's are much much easier to find in the NFL than starting-caliber LT's. If you're lucky enough to find a good and cheap LT, then you can still land a good and cheap RT and reserve the extra saved cash for other roster positions.

 

I agree and this is why I think that the TD/Bills plan was to play JJ at LT until the market gave him more of a contract than his play merited and then the plan was to switch MW to LT and fill the RT slot with the cheaper and easier to find player.  MW delayed these plans by having a meltdown when the Grammy that raised him died (understandable because he is only human though not condoneable because he let his teammates and the region down).  MW delayed the employment of these plans by needing at least an extra year of work before he could be switched by:

 

A. Having the meltdown last pre-season which made 04 a conditioning and restoring confidence year for him rather than taking on the challenge of flipping sides.

 

B. Spending his first two years under the not-ready-for-primetime OL coaching of Vinky and Ruel who each brought one year of previous OL coaching experience to the job rather than the 25 years of making mistakes and learning from Jim JMac has.

 

3. I'm not convinced that Mike Williams was a better pick than McKinnie. Maybe McKinnie has had his similar share of growing pains like MW, but at least he plays LT.

 

As bad as the MW growing pains have been (and actually they were not individuall bad only MW is to blame until last pre-season) they have not been as bad as the growing pains McKinnie has shown.

 

He held out the first few games of his rookie year and made his first year a lost year for all intents and purposes and this was all on him.  While the meltdown suffered by MW was worse from my judgment, McKinnie'swork ethic has been questioned in a way I heard about all the way in another NFL town.

 

McKinnie has simply had production issues which are clearly linked to the problems of others (Tice has never gotten Minn really cooking and they have not had an RB of WMs caliber or TH's running productivity for him though Culpepper and the Minn passing attack have been very good) but overall he is much closer to being a real bust than MW from what I see and hear.

 

I think it will take some work to flip sides but it can be done. MW had the responsibility of guarding a left-handed QBs blindside in college so I think he should not have a problem guarding the blindside as a pro. The difficulty which he will have to master is switching his technique to opposing an LDE rather  than an RDE but I think this is a doable challenege.

 

 

4. I'm also not convinced that MW can be declared a "bust." He's certainly overpaid for his current productivity, but then again so is Eric Moulds, Troy Vincent, and...yes, even JP Losman. And unlike other 2002 draft picks (Ryan Denney, Josh Reed, Coy Wire), MW has at least been a steady contributing starter with noticeable improvements made each year. While I'd still rather have McKinnie than MW, MW under McNally's tutelage could very well become a Pro Bowl regular at RT. Not bad when you consider the frequency of busts that have been made in the top 10 draft slots over the years (best case example: Cleveland Browns).

 

I agree that labeling MW a bust seems much more to be fan carping from us Bills' partisans than a real football assessmemnt (hey we're fans, MW is paid the big bucks to take our whining like a man and smile all the way to the bank).

374325[/snapback]

[Bill from NYC]

I'll add my $0.02 on this debate:

 

1. No way do I think TD & Co. originally drafted Mike Williams to be a RT. What happened was simply that MW didn't have the LT position's necessary foot speed that TD's scouts unfortunately projected for him.

 

2. Arguing that having an overpaid RT is OK as long as you have a cheaper LT is wrong. Starting-caliber RT's are much much easier to find in the NFL than starting-caliber LT's. If you're lucky enough to find a good and cheap LT, then you can still land a good and cheap RT and reserve the extra saved cash for other roster positions.

 

3. I'm not convinced that Mike Williams was a better pick than McKinnie. Maybe McKinnie has had his similar share of growing pains like MW, but at least he plays LT.

 

4. I'm also not convinced that MW can be declared a "bust." He's certainly overpaid for his current productivity, but then again so is Eric Moulds, Troy Vincent, and...yes, even JP Losman. And unlike other 2002 draft picks (Ryan Denney, Josh Reed, Coy Wire), MW has at least been a steady contributing starter with noticeable improvements made each year. While I'd still rather have McKinnie than MW, MW under McNally's tutelage could very well become a Pro Bowl regular at RT. Not bad when you consider the frequency of busts that have been made in the top 10 draft slots over the years (best case example: Cleveland Browns).

374325[/snapback]

 

Very good post KH.

I am asking you to consider the draft slot (#4) and the salary when using the label "bust" for the sake of this conversation.

Again, I would be pleased with MW were he drafted in the 2nd or better yet 3rd round, but as we speak, he is gobbling up almost 10% of the Bills salary cap allotment, and this AFTER renegotiating!

Yeah, I am gonna stick with the term "bust."

[finknottle]

McGahee ran to the right most plays last year. Who did he run behind ? Williams, right ? With a little more mobility from the QB position, I'm less worried about LT...

374303[/snapback]

 

Let me get this straight - McGahee ran to the right most plays, behind Williams. He averaged 3.97 ypc. Of the other 19 rushing leaders in the top 20, 15 had a higher ypc and 4 had worse. Seems to me that the McG-Williams combo doesn't look very special, and one or both have to be overated.

[Alaska Darin]

Yeah, I am gonna stick with the term "bust."

374412[/snapback]

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Credit McNally as you will for this sudden turn of events, but it did not occur until the very second that WM walked ON the football field, and Travis Henry schlepped OFF the football field.

374290[/snapback]

 

Wrong.

 

You are correct that JMac should not be considered a miracle worker (he has said this himself from even before he was hired). He is very good and is such an upgrade over Vinky and Ruel it isn't even funny, but he should not be expected to and will not perform miracles on this team unless the O scheme is good (it is behind TC/MM), we have the skill players (we do with Moulds/Evans/WM), and the other players are at least adequate (I think they can be). However, no one should expect a human to be super-human.

 

However, while you fault folks for disregarding the true fact that our W/L turned around with WM starting compared to that with TH starting, you also disregard other impacts that I think had a real impact on improved performance by the Bills.

 

I do not disagree that having WM start was a huge upgrade over having TH start (though the notion that this upgrade was in better blitz pick-up by WM rather than the real upgrade being that he provided a far better outside threat with his greater speed and extraordinary stiff-arm is a bit bizarre to me). However how can you also disregard:

 

1. The role of the Bills learning and employing a much better O scheme which really took hold in conjunction with winning streak rather than with WM getting the start or a lot of PT last year.

 

2. Bledsoe establishing himself as a threat which stopped LBs and DB from commiting totally to the blitz with the success of our flea flickers where WM pitched it back and Bledsoe even ran some positive draws and sneaks.

 

3. JMacs teaching and reconfiguration of the blocking which not only saw the revitalization of MW, extraordinary use of the jorneyman Smith, eventual upgrade to Tucker at LG (not to mention surviving the hiccup of losing Teague in the midst of the streak) and even employing Bannan and Adams to improve redzone production.

 

4. Other switches and tweaks and non-O factors which were minor compared to massive shifts or off point explaining O implementation but in total added up to significantly better O performance (for example, the D and ST performance do not explain better O performance but the D and ST performance had a huge impact as opponents were playing with the Bills in the lead and the O had better field position.

 

The mistake in your arguments (and I am not calling you out simply judging your arguments) is that they overclaim by saying that the Bills O and production turnaround coincided exactly to WM being on the field when it did not.

 

Even if the turnaround had coincided with the potential coincidence of WM starting or getting PT it is still more legitimately explained by these other factors above which you flat out say does not have a part in leading to the turnaround.

 

even beyond this fact, if you look at the turnaround with events for the Bills they do not line-up exactly with WM waliking onto the field to start or get significant PT in the way you imply or claim.

 

For example, it took a couple of games with WM starting for the Bills to make a total turnaround. We were 0-4 with TH starting, but it is not like we immediately went on a winning streak when WM walked on the field as you say. We did We won the Miami game with WM starting to go 1-4 but WM struggled a bit in the first half but played a great game to wear down Miami (this was actually how Travis got his 1300+ yards the two previous seasons so I wouldn't claim a night and day difference between the two).

 

Game 6 against the Ravens actually did see TH start, but WM was clearly the man and if you want to give sole responsibility to the RB for the events of this game (as silly as giving sole credit/blame to any player in an NFL game is) then you have to lay this one on WM (unless you want to claim that the issue here is not whether WM walked on the field but whether he started the game).

 

The streak finally began in game 7 and WM played a key role with a couple of long runs and his scoring two timely TDs from short yardage (the first by a Bills RB in quite a while). However, he actually just squeezed over the century mark with 102 yards and this game was clearly a team win with the ST and D playing a huge role with WM not even on the field rather this win being totally the switch from TH to WM as starter.

 

The events do line up smoothly at all with your too broad claim that it changed completely when WM started. Your claim that events changed merely with him walking on the field diverges even more from the events.

 

WM actually saw some significant time when we were amassing an 0-4 record that cannot be attributed to WM for blame at all (or TH for that matter because we lost these games due to critical D failures and the ST not producing like it did later in the season, and other O idiocy in addition or besides TH). However, WM clearly walked on the field and saw significant time during the 0-4 start which was great because it gave legitimate confidence that he really was back (an event which did not occur for me until the SF game when he played when we thought he may be out with a hyperextended knee in the previous game) but not because he performed anything like more than a hopeful first year player the first few times he walked on the field.

 

Speciifcally the facts of WM walking on the field were;

 

Game 1- Surprisingly to many he saw significant time in his first pro game as was the RB for the fourth quarter as Henry sat with a nick. Henry had an OK but not great game as the O did enough to win if the D played adequately in the critcal final drive but they did not and we lost. The claim of a night and day difference as soom as WM walked on the field is stupid to expect and does not fit reality to claim as Th and WM both produced about 3-1/2 yards a carry in the 3 quarters where Henry was he one who walked on the field and the 1 quarter where WM was the one who walked on the field.

 

Game 2- WM walked on th field very little in this game (his loss of 10 yards on 1 of his 2 runs probably had something to do with this). Perhaps one wants to blame the coaches for going with TH rather than WM though ironically it was actually FB Shelton who missed the critical blitz pick-up in this game) henry certainly did not do the job againsr a tough Oak run D so blaming him for not performing seems legit to me. He did get the ball in for a TD on a bad call by the refs that even the NFL admitted was a mistake but the best RB does not even leave any doubt and allow the refs to make a bad call. TH was far from being a good back for the Bills as his reaction to feeling the team gave up on him was to give up on the team. This is not good and we should trade him due to this though it is a leap to also claim that his bad reaction to the Bills makes him untradeable by us. As seen by recent events he clearly does appear to have value in trade and I am glad that TD did not cut him as some (mostly firends of TH as this was just what he wanted) advocated doing months ago.

 

Game 3- WM once again did not walk onto the field though this happened in part because TH gaomed 98 yards in 24 carries and had what Bills Daily called his best performance of the year. Still this "best" performance showed why he was not up to an adequate performance for the Bills as he failed at the critical times when he fell down and went boom in front of a hole on a 3rd and 1 and he ran to a different side than the play called for and Bledsoe fumbled when hit on this blown play. One would not be taking account of reality if one ignores the positives of the Henry performance this day OR one ignores that he did not do the job in crunch time.

 

Game 4- This was a good game for WM but once again shows that it is an overclaim to say he made a difference in events and game result which occured when he walked on the field. Even a good game by WM did not make the difference as the D failed to hold the Jets down with adequate play in crunch time.

 

It is simply contradictory and inconsistent to accuse WM of not playing well enough to make the difference in the Jets game wjn it was the D failure to stop the jts from getting a game-winning FG after he made critical rushes on the drive for the points which gave the Bills the lead, but to also not recognize this was true in the Jax game where Henry got yards on the drives to give the Bills the lead which the D failed to hold on the last drive. Neither RB is the prime blame for either loss.

 

Likewise WM clearly took the field in this game and it did not change the result so it is hard to see how one logically gives his prescense and play credit for chamgimg the events positively in this game when the results were not positive (even if one wants to break this down and claim that they did not make the switch soon enough as shown by us getting shut out early and then WM playing a critical role in the drive leading to out first TD, it was actually a 7 yard un by TH which was the key run leading to the second Billls TD).

 

The bottomline is:

 

1. The Bills actually did not begin to change events as soon as WM walked on the field or even as soon as he started (events were bad against Jax, NYJ and Balt where he saw some significant PT)

 

2. One might try to claim that him starting was the difference in getting better results, but as our success seemed to be actually independent of whether he did well (he only had 25 yards in the game he was hurt where we won going away) so WM's play and prescence were great but does not even conincide with our production last year and even when it was great was clearly not the root of all posibitive achievements.

 

3. As far as WM's great work, it seems pretty unsupported by the facts to claim that his great contribution over Henry was blitz pick-up and to disregard even WMs greater contributions as an outside running force or to disregard the numerous other factors like scheme and improved Bledsoe performance which are more removed from WM as the reasons behind event occurence.

 

it seems little more than wishful thinking to attribute all things positive to WM being around.

[d_wag]

McGahee ran to the right most plays last year. Who did he run behind ? Williams, right ?

374303[/snapback]

 

willis splits:

 

right side -- 82 attempts

middle -- 79 attempts

left side -- 64 attempts

left sideline -- 30 attempts

right sideline -- 29 attemps

 

i would hardly call that "most".......very even distribution

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?statsId=6359

[San-O]

willis splits:

 

right side -- 82 attempts

middle -- 79 attempts

left side -- 64 attempts

left sideline -- 30 attempts

right sideline -- 29 attemps

 

i would hardly call that "most".......very even distribution

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?statsId=6359

374450[/snapback]

 

 

Yes, and in addition, the right side is considered the strong side due to the

TE playing outside of RT. Another blocker.