Fake-Fat Sunny Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 Below is a thread started by Simon (welcome back and this is truly a sign that the real season is starting and the fooling around of the off-season has ended, let the fooling around of real football begin). I am posting this as a separate thread because the lengthy TH thread which has finally moved to some specifics rather than simple declarations based on false claims that opposing claims that TH is worthless means the poster thinks his good (I think the statement in the thread that Henry is not anywhere as good as Mcgahee but he was significantly better than Kinton really summarizes well the mixed bad rating those who have defended Henry feel about this definitely flawedbut defintiely accomplished player, had turned into more of a debate about how good Walter Payton was at blitz pickup. I agree he was great but I think this dead horse is worth beating a little as it focuses on assessment of the 2005 Bills. I have pasted below a couple of post which I think can be responded to in terms of specific points and asks the two posters if they wish to take the time to share with us some of the specific stats or situations which support these more specific assessments of Henry that simple unsupported general claims he sucks but are still not supported by much interms of real indications that make them all that believable. Here goes: John from Hemet said: I really think that Donahoe pulled a rabbit out of his hat on the Henry deal...... - Lets face it.....as soon as there was legit competition on the roster Travis Henry fell apart.....he couldn't handle it....... I agree, the failure of TH to make a succesful or even credible effort at making the 2 good RB attack work made him a great candidate to trade if we received good value for him. The rabbit out of the hat description is neither here nor there for me as there is little need to claim some analogy for how good or not atypicl getting a 3rd for Henry was. The facts of this case were: 1. TD was very opportunistic as a GM should be in getting another year out of Travis as a resource to be used as a resource or traded beyind his original agreement. While TH created this situation by himself without any TD encouragement by mismanaging his money, TD did exactly what a good GM should do by getting this year out of him for chump change. Further, he did a top notch GM job by using the fact he had Pro Bowler under contract for now 3 more years to draft an extremely talented RB who was injured and would need at least a year of non-play to recover, allow WM to take the starting job if his injury healed as the Bills docs suspected in this second year, and take the gift we received of owning rights to Henry for a third year to either use him in a 2 RB attack if he remained mature or trade him for value if he broke down While one can easily invest in some far off argument as to whether this fits the rabbit/hat analogy, I simply do not see how one can deny that TD did the job that a good GM would do in extending ownership of TH (and many GMs in this league are clearly that Matt Millens and Mike Lynns of the world and are simply not very good) and that TD played the fall-out of the results of this opportunity in terms of the WM pick, squeezing a productive 2003 out of TH when WM was recovering, managed the WM recovery well and got a productive 2004 out of him) and at least appropriate silence but pouting during the season out of TH, and pulled off a trade of TH for a first day pick while some of TSW and among outside pundits were saying a greedy TD should have taken a 5th when offered, traded him for a damaged LT we did not even want when he was cut and some even argued TH should be cut and we get no value. One can easily claim this was no magic trick but who cares. One cannot credibly claim that TD did not do at least what a GM should do (as opposed to those who seem to claim he can do no right) in getting TH another year for chump change and that he actually proved the several folks who accused TG of fouling up the TH situation by passing on a 5th, a wounded player or cutting him as being simply all wrong. - His blitz pickup last year was fricken horrible.....I think we could have put a rookie in there and gotten a better effort......I dont want to turn this into a "I love Willis" thread but lets face it.....there was a noticable difference from when Willis was doing compared to Travis...and it was WILLIS' FIRST YEAR Judging and arguing blitz pick-up is hard to do as there are not even any individual stats which present good indications of this. However, if one is going to make claims of someone being fricken horrible or or geing noticeably good there should be some or actual a lot (if the claim is so extreme as to claim a player horrible or the difference was noticeable) of specific plays that can be pointed to. One can make it easy for us morons by pointing to specific plays at specific time reference in games. I don't expect folks to have the memory or do the work to do this, though it would be a great thing is they did. Failing this specificity then I would think anyone with the temerity to make the extreme claims mentioned above should at least be able to site some games they remember as proving their point. Actually, while I think TH had allowed WM taking his job to get to him and he did make anumber of boners such as going a different than Bledsoe on a missed handoff against NE which led to a fumble and a Seymour TD and also Henry failed to find the endzone on a couple of short yardage plays against Oak which indicated a lack of desire and an admitted wrong ref call by the NFL that mental wizardry and toughness were not a big part of the TH game in 2004. However, I think there are few (if any actually) plays in 2004 where TH missed critical blitz pick-ups. I remember Shelton performing this error in one game cited in Bills Daily in the third or fourth game if you want to find a reference. There was a clear case of TH missing a blitz pick-up in his first game as a rookie in 2001 leading to a Doug Flutie sack (just to show I am not asking for something impossible to remember). However, there certainly were no more than a couple of cases one can point to in the 5 games TH started in 2005 and a couple of errors alone fall well short of comdemning him as friggin horrible and again I think there well may be no real specifics which can be pointed to and this claim is reduced to being a fact-free opinion. While I cannot credibly go out on the limp that 34 and AVP seemed to be willing to crawl out on and say his blitz pick-up work improved in 2004. I think that they idea that while he could be called abysmal as a rookie, this issue was a non-concern among the usually vocal TSW crowd in 2002 and 2003 and I do not think there is much or any evidence beyond fact-free opinion to be sited for these years and 2004 that blitz pick-up was a big probem for TH. If it was cite the plays and I will look for them on the tape I have of almost the entire 2004 season or at least cite the games please (or perhaps just drop this unsubstantiated claim). - He was never going to be a outlet receiver.....his shelf life with the way he runs is going to be short I agree his shelf life is likely to be short the way he runs as seen by him having very good seasons in 2002 and 2003 but an essentially worthless 2004 all of which were marred by injury. My guess in terms of likely outomes is that TN will see two productive RBs go down next year. However, on the first point, this is simply wrong based on real life occurences. TH caught over 40 passes in 2002 when he was used as an outlet receiver and while he and the rest of RBs in this league clearly have not been Marshall Faulk even in their best years. TH has shown production that he can be an effective outlet receiver in an O which used him this way. He was not an effective outlet receiver in 2003, but was anyone in the 2003 Nonfeense of Kevin Killdrive effective that year? In fact if any olayer deserves kudos in this O it was TH gaining 1300+ on the ground. Likewise in 2004, TH correctly can be blamed for not being as good as WM (though this has got to be one of the lamest blames cast) as the offense behind the rocket arm of Bledsoe even on short passes did not become effective until the mid point of the season and TH was riding the pines. WM despite the fact his production was much like THs in terms of YPC initilly got him game into overdrive by midseason and most important for Bills team production the ST and D really began to dominate, TC/MM established Bledsoe as a threat which relieved some of the sacks and WM did add to the team threat with is superior stiff-arm to most and better outside speed than Henry and our O improved. However, TH's failing as an outlet receiver are a minor if non-issue here and his 2002 performace as a pass catcher shows he can produce in this role if used this way (even taking into some missed catches from the non-touch of Bledsoe in 2003). - He was NOT coming back this year. Though I agree because TD git adequate trade value for him, if TD had not moved him because we could not get a third I see nothing TH could do but come back to the Bills and do the best job he could do as a #2 and then hit the FA market last year. Unless TH decided to pull a Wickey Williams he had no other choice. He needed to play and be praised by his teammates as a man who backs up his partners or he would not get the extension he wanted. If he had attempted to go hard core and accumulate only the 6 games needed to be an FA next year, not only would the Bills have actually stopped this from happening an retained owership of TH, but if he proved to be devious enough to pull this off he would have so damaged his value among teams now not interested in a player willing and able to abuse his employer if he becomes upset, but the word would bet around the leafue of him being a teammate unwilling to support his brothers and also have to deal with the whispering campaign from TD and the others that TH really had two less than productive seasons in a row (2004 and the 6 games as a back-up in 2005) that his value would be demolished if he refused to comeback as asked by TD who consistely has left the door open fo him by praising him. - Rather then trade Travis in what a lot considered to be a weak draft...he got a 3rd which could be a very good 3rd in a much deeper draft I agree - We could package that pick and move up.....it gives us great flexibility I agree' All in all this was a great job by TD moving a malcontent back who was not nearly as good as WM, but really is a good player if things work out as they did in 2002. Bill in NYC said OK, let's just completely ignore the fact that sacks were drastically reduced when Travis was benched. It made little to no difference. Sound good? - I hate it when folks reduce the claims of others to adjectives like lunacy. but a claim that the sack number were driven by WM being better at blitx pick-up than TH are bizarre non-football thinking at best. JMac being a better teacher and OL organizer than Vinky and Ruel is difficult to deny and is the starting point for any sack improvement (which actually included a one sack game in which Henry started which preceeded the switch to WM as a starter. TC did a phenomenal job of forcing opposing defenders not to sell out completely to the blitz or outside rush by 1. actually using Bledsoe effectively in the delayed QB draw up the middle and using (flea-flickers with pitces back to Bledsoe or from Bledsoe to WM which forced defenders not to blitz but wait to see what we were doing this time, 2. Utilizing WM not for an after the fact blitz pickup guru, bu by proactively using him an outside rush threat with his stiff-arm and great speed. The claim of WM doing better than TH at blitz pickup is unsubstantiated in terms of anything approaching evidence as outline above and even if he had happened to be better there are far more important things done to curtail the sack numbers than blitz pick-up work. I will admit that it is sometimes tough to assign blame for sacks. I truly believe that Travis was too stupid to even comprehend what his assignment actually was. -This was not the case when he ran productively in 2002 and 2003, im 2002 when he caugh over 40 passes or looking at the improvement in his game from his rookie year to his Pro Bowl and next year. Why don't we wait and see just how stellar his performances are at Tenn.? It wont be long. I have a feeling that poor McNair is going to be one hurtin' SOB. I also think that TN is going to be disappointed by the results of this trade as I think bith Brown and Henry will not complete the season. However, one need not wait for these results to see that the above arguments by you and and John from Hemet are essentially non-supported by the facts. However, mif lovely wife will tell you that I am not perfect and god has not fished with me yet. Please share something beyond mere opinion which supports your views.
envirojeff Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 god has not fished with me yet. 391060[/snapback] You must be some catch? Jeff
beerme1 Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 WTF? man WTF? I read all that and I'm not sure where you stand!
EndZoneCrew Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 TH=former Buffalo Bill=MOVE THE !@#$ ON......btw how long did it take you to write that 10 page paper you call a post???
jad1 Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 Henry's a Titan now. Clog up their board with this nonsense.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 I'd be scared to ask The Human Filibuster, "What time is it?" By the time he got done telling me, it wouldn't be the time I was looking for.
Reuben Gant Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 Bledsoe was sacked less when Willis was in the game for two reasons. Willis didn't blow the blitz pick-up. He was a home-run threat whenever he was in the game, which makes it hard to blitz in the first place.
Ramius Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 Last time i checked, this was a Bills message board. also last time i checked, bledsoe and henry didnt play for the bills anymore...so why the constant obsession over them still...get over it...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 Where can I get the book on tape version of this post?
LabattBlue Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 2,501 words & 13,078 characters including spaces. This has to be in the top 10 FFS posts in terms of length. PS How often do you have to replace your keyboard.
Ramius Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 2,501 words & 13,078 characters including spaces. This has to be in the top 10 FFS posts in terms of length. PS How often do you have to replace your keyboard. 391247[/snapback] i would say he'd do a hell of a job publishing his own yearly NFL preview magazine, but i cant see too many people wanting to buy a 4,000 page book...
VABills Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 2,501 words & 13,078 characters including spaces. This has to be in the top 10 FFS posts in terms of length. PS How often do you have to replace your keyboard. 391247[/snapback] You haven't seen some of his other ones.
taterhill Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 I would say his 2289 posts would b the equivalent of 50,000 for most posters...who has time to read all of that..my toaster streudel might burn
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted July 27, 2005 Author Posted July 27, 2005 I do apologize to those folks who seem to feel they waste time reading rather than ignoring my lengthy posts which are often done late at night. I also really appreciate those folks who from time to time said they like them or even are nice enough to respond to them. To clarify the situation, once again it is this. 1. Because of requests I do sometimes (particularly during regular season when there is something of more real things to talk about in this fantasy of football try to post Cliffnotes for these diatribes and I will again try to do this beginning with camp in a couple of weeks. 2. I really do often prattle on or repeat myself in these posts as I am really thinking out loud (or at least in photons) as I write. 3, One thing I am really lucky about is that I actually am sometines paid while doing these notes. My work sometimes involves sitting in on lengthy conference calls initiated at odd hours by folks in foreign lands. I need to be on the call for the part of the agenda I work on and be there at least half listening as the agenda rolls on. I half listen but mute my participation in the calls and actually prattle on about the Bills and then focus more intently as my agenda time draws closer. The environmental muckety muck is interesting and my work requires me to listen intently sometimes to read the dynamics of interaction, but often I feel my time is better spent have listening to the calls and churning away on Bills stuff (usually in preparation for being the font of all things Bills related at family gatherings. The bottomline is please take the best and leave the rest for my too long ramblings. It works for me and this is great. It works for some of you and this is even better. The folks it does not work for, I really am confused why they waste their time reading my ramblings and taking more of the precious time to comment on them. Geez.
Talonz Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 Ok, thats IT!! I am convinced that FFS is not a person but a room full of monkeys with typewriters... FFS: On a serious note: Dude GET A LIFE....No offense but come on who in the hell is going to take time to read a post like that, ESPECIALLY about someone who doesn't play for the Bills anymore? TH is GONE. We now have an extra 3rd rounder. Nothing to see here. Move along. You seriously scare me! ( seriously! )
Ramius Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 I do apologize to those folks who seem to feel they waste time reading rather than ignoring my lengthy posts which are often done late at night. I also really appreciate those folks who from time to time said they like them or even are nice enough to respond to them. To clarify the situation, once again it is this. 1. Because of requests I do sometimes (particularly during regular season when there is something of more real things to talk about in this fantasy of football try to post Cliffnotes for these diatribes and I will again try to do this beginning with camp in a couple of weeks. 2. I really do often prattle on or repeat myself in these posts as I am really thinking out loud (or at least in photons) as I write. 3, One thing I am really lucky about is that I actually am sometines paid while doing these notes. My work sometimes involves sitting in on lengthy conference calls initiated at odd hours by folks in foreign lands. I need to be on the call for the part of the agenda I work on and be there at least half listening as the agenda rolls on. I half listen but mute my participation in the calls and actually prattle on about the Bills and then focus more intently as my agenda time draws closer. The environmental muckety muck is interesting and my work requires me to listen intently sometimes to read the dynamics of interaction, but often I feel my time is better spent have listening to the calls and churning away on Bills stuff (usually in preparation for being the font of all things Bills related at family gatherings. The bottomline is please take the best and leave the rest for my too long ramblings. It works for me and this is great. It works for some of you and this is even better. The folks it does not work for, I really am confused why they waste their time reading my ramblings and taking more of the precious time to comment on them. Geez. 391308[/snapback] Tho i dont read all of your posts, (i have to get SOME work done here at work) i usually enjoy reading what you hafta say, even if it gets a bit long winded sometimes...i am really waiting for the season to get going so we have some real football to talk about and write about tho, because there are about 4 or 5 piles of unrecognizeable organic matter around here that were once dead horses, but now have been beaten so badly over the past few months that who knows what they are.
Alaska Darin Posted July 27, 2005 Posted July 27, 2005 When I was in the military, the standard for writing was called "The ABC's". It stood for Accuracy, Brevity, and Clarity. Is your Indian name "To make a short story long"?
Recommended Posts