Stussy109 Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 Is anybody else upset we let a solid Veteran QB who we gave up a 1st rd pick for in 2002 walk for free? Considering the #'s he's putting up, we should have gotten at least SOMETHING. I know TD and MM were being respectful by letting DB walk, but it's a business world. How about Dallas gives up a 5th rd pick conditional to a 2nd rd pick based on his performance. Dallas needed Bledsoe more than we thought. Knowing the NFC Bledsoe may make the pro-bowl, and take the boys into the playoffs. Just wish we would have gotten some collateral for Bledsoe instead of letting him walk free.
ofiba Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 No one wanted him last year. He looked awful on our team.
UConn James Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 The milk is spilled. You can't drink it. And it's really of no use talking about it except as to say that we need someone who won't spill the milk in the future.
KnightRider Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 Is anybody else upset we let a solid Veteran QB who we gave up a 1st rd pick for in 2002 walk for free? Considering the #'s he's putting up, we should have gotten at least SOMETHING. I know TD and MM were being respectful by letting DB walk, but it's a business world. How about Dallas gives up a 5th rd pick conditional to a 2nd rd pick based on his performance. Dallas needed Bledsoe more than we thought. Knowing the NFC Bledsoe may make the pro-bowl, and take the boys into the playoffs. Just wish we would have gotten some collateral for Bledsoe instead of letting him walk free. 472894[/snapback] Nope. And no, you can go back and get compensation just because you sold your Intel stock in 1981... At the end of the year, Bledsoe didn't have that kind of value. In fact, the Bills didn't think he was worth the money he cost on this team. And they were right.
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 I just thought about it... Not that it did happen in the DB case. How would the NFL handle collusion. That being a player that plays badly because he wants to end up on another team... Therefore tanking his value. It has been speculated that Bill Parcells wanted DB all along and would take him back... The cry out of both DB and BP camps was always no, no, no. They had to be talking? Then wham-o. They hook-up. BP does seem like this kinda guy... Look at the whole Pats-Jets-BB fiasco. Just your run-of-the-mill conspiracy theory, I return you back to your regularly scheduled program.
Fezmid Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 I just thought about it... Not that it did happen in the DB case. How would the NFL handle collusion. That being a player that plays badly because he wants to end up on another team... Therefore tanking his value. It has been speculated that Bill Parcells wanted DB all along and would take him back... The cry out of both DB and BP camps was always no, no, no. They had to be talking? Then wham-o. They hook-up. BP does seem like this kinda guy... Look at the whole Pats-Jets-BB fiasco. Just your run-of-the-mill conspiracy theory, I return you back to your regularly scheduled program. 472970[/snapback] Your theory doesn't work though, because DB didn't tank the season; we went 9-3 after the September fun. In a general case, the chances of being caught (unless you're the Timerwolves) are almost zero anyway. CW
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 Your theory doesn't work though, because DB didn't tank the season; we went 9-3 after the September fun. In a general case, the chances of being caught (unless you're the Timerwolves) are almost zero anyway. CW 472973[/snapback] You are right. Then there was the coin toss thingy... What if DB planted that himself to get the heck out of this hell-hole?
UConn James Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 Your theory doesn't work though, because DB didn't tank the season; we went 9-3 after the September fun. In a general case, the chances of being caught (unless you're the Timerwolves) are almost zero anyway. CW 472973[/snapback] Not that I'm on board with it, but Drew did fairly tank the win-and-you're-in game vs. Pitt. Made sure to show everyone with the streak that he still had something, but came up small in a big game. Ensured that the coaches and TD were very disappointed in his performance. And even with something as small as choosing the opposite end zone they distinctly told him to, there was a battle of wills going on. If it is the case that he intentioanlly tanked his way out of town, I can't really blame Drew. He's in a great spot that highlights his strengths now, and he's away from people who were putting together a gumbo of one of everything that's in the fridge and hoping it tasted good. Which is the same thing they're doing now.
Fezmid Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 Not that I'm on board with it, but Drew did fairly tank the win-and-you're-in game vs. Pitt. Made sure to show everyone with the streak that he still had something, but came up small in a big game. Ensured that the coaches and TD were very disappointed in his performance. And even with something as small as choosing the opposite end zone they distinctly told him to, there was a battle of wills going on. If it is the case that he intentioanlly tanked his way out of town, I can't really blame Drew. He's in a great spot that highlights his strengths now, and he's away from people who were putting together a gumbo of one of everything that's in the fridge and hoping it tasted good. Which is the same thing they're doing now. 472986[/snapback] If he single-handledly lost the game, maybe... But we were a Josh Reed holding penalty away from scoring a TD, then Lindell missed the kick, then the defense didn't show up... And the game unraveled from there. I'm not sure I really believe the coin-toss thing personally; if it were true, I would've expected to see a lot of people talking about it, besides our favorite coffee-drinking reporter. Regardless, it did work out for him. And it could work out for others and the league wouldn't be able to stop it, assuming the player wanted to risk it. CW
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 If he single-handledly lost the game, maybe... But we were a Josh Reed holding penalty away from scoring a TD, then Lindell missed the kick, then the defense didn't show up... And the game unraveled from there. I'm not sure I really believe the coin-toss thing personally; if it were true, I would've expected to see a lot of people talking about it, besides our favorite coffee-drinking reporter. Regardless, it did work out for him. And it could work out for others and the league wouldn't be able to stop it, assuming the player wanted to risk it. CW 472989[/snapback] That is what I was thinking all along. That is why I am against the salary system/free agent system that is in place. Look at what TO did to Baltimore. Teams are gonna get a bad rap and nobody will want to go there. There will still be parity. But, mark my words... The good teams will stay good and the bad will stay bad. The bad will just hover in mediocrity. Cincy is breaking out of that mold because of the wholesale attitude adjustment made by their management and coach. Got to hand it to them. Just my $.02... The old way of doing business favors an old-school owner like RW. The Bills would have competeted just fine.
UConn James Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 I'm not sure I really believe the coin-toss thing personally; if it were true, I would've expected to see a lot of people talking about it, besides our favorite coffee-drinking reporter. 472989[/snapback] On the contrary, if it weren't true, I would've expected DB to be at the podium saying something like, "Obviously, we've* got to execute better at determining which end zone we're going to defend after the coin flip, obviously. Obviously." The fact that he never refuted the story speaks to itself. *"we've" meaning all 1 of the Buffalo Bills starting QBs.
Fezmid Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 On the contrary, if it weren't true, I would've expected DB to be at the podium saying something like, "Obviously, we've* got to execute better at determining which end zone we're going to defend after the coin flip, obviously. Obviously." The fact that he never refuted the story speaks to itself. *"we've" meaning all 1 of the Buffalo Bills starting QBs. 473004[/snapback] Why would he care? This story came out either right before or right after he was cut (and either way, he already knew the Bills were cutting him). Why make a big deal about one article? CW
In space no one can hear Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 Is anybody else upset we let a solid Veteran QB who we gave up a 1st rd pick for in 2002 walk for free? Considering the #'s he's putting up, we should have gotten at least SOMETHING. I know TD and MM were being respectful by letting DB walk, but it's a business world. How about Dallas gives up a 5th rd pick conditional to a 2nd rd pick based on his performance. Dallas needed Bledsoe more than we thought. Knowing the NFC Bledsoe may make the pro-bowl, and take the boys into the playoffs. Just wish we would have gotten some collateral for Bledsoe instead of letting him walk free. 472894[/snapback] I agree with much of your comments. Donahoe is considered a "Master Poker Player" by so many on this board- yet Belichick was able to squeeze a number one draft pick out of him for Bledsoe. (with only the Bengals interested and taking into consideration Bledsoe insistence that he wouldn't play there). Also-with the way Dallas scooped him up so quickly...Donahoe appeared to misjudge their interest and thus lost a chance to get some form of compensation. Donahoe is a two time loser when it comes to Bledsoe.
Navy Chief Navy Pride Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 Is anybody else upset we let a solid Veteran QB who we gave up a 1st rd pick for in 2002 walk for free? Considering the #'s he's putting up, we should have gotten at least SOMETHING. I know TD and MM were being respectful by letting DB walk, but it's a business world. How about Dallas gives up a 5th rd pick conditional to a 2nd rd pick based on his performance. Dallas needed Bledsoe more than we thought. Knowing the NFC Bledsoe may make the pro-bowl, and take the boys into the playoffs. Just wish we would have gotten some collateral for Bledsoe instead of letting him walk free. 472894[/snapback] HE LOOKED GREAT HIS 1ST YEAR WITH US AS WELL. THE SLIDE WILL START SOON.
Fezmid Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 HE LOOKED GREAT HIS 1ST YEAR WITH US AS WELL. THE SLIDE WILL START SOON. 473149[/snapback] REALLY? THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE HEARD THAT THEORY BEFORE.
Bill from NYC Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 I agree with much of your comments.Donahoe is considered a "Master Poker Player" by so many on this board- yet Belichick was able to squeeze a number one draft pick out of him for Bledsoe. (with only the Bengals interested and taking into consideration Bledsoe insistence that he wouldn't play there). Also-with the way Dallas scooped him up so quickly...Donahoe appeared to misjudge their interest and thus lost a chance to get some form of compensation. Donahoe is a two time loser when it comes to Bledsoe. 473135[/snapback] Two time loser? I think not wrt Bledsoe. It should be remembered that he got Bledsoe for the following year's 1st round pick, one of which he was able to salvage by trading Price, who was a ufa and not all that great in any event. He used that pick for MaGahee. Not a bad deal at all. Do you remember what JP cost us? At least you knew what to expect from Drew. I am far from a TD worshipper, but let's be fair. No, he can't bring us an OL , but he DID get us a 3rd round pick for a drug addict who is a lousy player. He focuses too much on "skill" players, but he brought us Spikes, Fletcher and Adams. Sure, TD has made some bad moves, but it hasn't been ALL bad. That said, I too am losing patience.
Stussy109 Posted October 11, 2005 Author Posted October 11, 2005 I agree with much of your comments.Donahoe is considered a "Master Poker Player" by so many on this board- yet Belichick was able to squeeze a number one draft pick out of him for Bledsoe. (with only the Bengals interested and taking into consideration Bledsoe insistence that he wouldn't play there). Also-with the way Dallas scooped him up so quickly...Donahoe appeared to misjudge their interest and thus lost a chance to get some form of compensation. Donahoe is a two time loser when it comes to Bledsoe. 473135[/snapback] thank you, nicely put.
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 I agree with much of your comments.Donahoe is considered a "Master Poker Player" by so many on this board- yet Belichick was able to squeeze a number one draft pick out of him for Bledsoe. (with only the Bengals interested and taking into consideration Bledsoe insistence that he wouldn't play there). Also-with the way Dallas scooped him up so quickly...Donahoe appeared to misjudge their interest and thus lost a chance to get some form of compensation. Donahoe is a two time loser when it comes to Bledsoe. 473135[/snapback] I dom't think anyone here would say that TD is a master poker player because poker clearly is a an entire game and not just one hand. TD has had some extrarordinary episodes and made some extraordinary individual moves, but this team has never even made the playoffs in his tenure hear and no one and I mean no one can or even makes the claim that he is a master poker player. However, just as silly as it would be to declare him a master GM overall when he simply does not have the bottomline to show for it, it would also be silly no to acjknowledge that in specific episodes and cases he has read the market better than anyone else for that move and been the lead on some extraordinary individual cases which really go down in NFL history as among the best market reads ever. Without declaring all of these moves the best ever (they were not) but acknowledging they were special are: 1. Reading that Blank in AT essentially promised his customers and Michael Vick that he would spend whatever was necessary to get Peerless and TD led the charge in transtion tagging him and replaced the #1 he gave up for Bledsoe with a #1. 2. He hired and trusted his docs and made the almost completely unexpected move (it sure fooled Travis) of picking WM with that pick. 3. The WM pick was raised to an even more special level by: A. TD recognizing that the first round run on DL players meant that he could pass on Kelsay with the #18 pick and still get him in the 2nd round when actually few would have complained (except for those who complain about everything TD does regardless of reality) if he had picked Kelsay with the #18. B. I doubt he knew PP would be so bad he would get cut, but overall it is hard to find a case where a value was traded who turned out as badly as PP for a value that looks as good as WM and it was only through the Bills ecercising the tag in an inventive way that this occured. C. He has added to the chair on potential benefit by using the prescence and play of WM to allow for the dealing of Henry. This move involved not only TD beind delivered the benfit of getting an extra year's ownership of TH's rights through TH's horrendous fiscal management, but also TD reading the market well when some of this board advocated simply cutting TH (I still think most of them were Henry relatives) and idiots like John Clayton accused him faltout of misreading the market and upbraided him for not taking the failing Shelton when offered. 4. Overall, the WM pick is the gift that keeps on giving as having him on the roster made it quite doable to pick up a 1st day pick by sticking to our guns on Henry, but also is part of TD consistently taking actions were seem to recognize that using your #1 pick on as player is almost always a bad idea if your goal is to win an SB. The big TD first round mistake was making the right pick given out needs and taking failure to date Mike Williams but the other consensus LT choice arrestee McKinnie makes trading the pick a way the best thing we could have done. Kudos to TD for using the market well to negotiate with top 5 player WM from a #18 cap slot and for trading away our #1 to find a replacement for RJ when we needed one (I generally think TD made a big mistake by resigning Bledsoe but given DB's great 2002 season and horrendous 2003 I think it would have been a wash if we simply cut him then, The DB/PP/WM chain is a gift whicj keeps on giving overall though as it played a key role in us being able to still be sitting on a fist day pick in exchange for TH. 5. Like the Bledsoe deal it did not work out perfectly in terms of the real world, but I also give him credit for reading and trying to manipulate tbe market and doing fairly well with out 2002 2nd round pick. We had a clear need for a DL player as we were trying to make up for Butler arranging a world where we lost Wiley, Big Ted, Hansen and Bruce in short order. Even worse, TD did err in hiring GW whp among his many errors moved us to his 4-2 from a 3-4 at the exact same moment our DL personel was melting away. I think kudos are merited to TD for: A. The Josh Reed pick has not played out like we want it overall, but his first year success as our #3 WR indicates it was not an unreasoable thing to attempt to try to take this consensus 1st rounder who dropped to the 2nd with that pick. B. TD read the market so well that he did attempt to fill our now larger DL need by stealing Ryan Denny off the phone from Pittsburgh. Though Denny's first year as a Bill sucked he is clearly a mainstay now on a D which was productive the last two seasons though it sucks now against the run. C. It also should be noted that the pick of Kelsay with our #2 in 2003 was not dictated so much by the failure of Denny but by the gaping need for a DL player left by the switch from 4-3 to 4-4. TD deserves part of the blame for this problem because of his GW error nuy likewise derves kudos for some good use of the market to address these issues. Overall, TD ain't no master popoker player for us overall as GM, but some of his individual moves have been simply outstanding and a credible assessment would acknowledge them as such.
Bill from NYC Posted October 11, 2005 Posted October 11, 2005 >>>>Overall, TD ain't no master popoker player for us overall as GM, but some of his individual moves have been simply outstanding and a credible assessment would acknowledge them as such.<<<<< I fully agree FFS, and tried to do the same in this thread.
Recommended Posts