finknottle Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 how can you say this? MW may be overpaid for the way he's played, but he was the #4 overall pick...you cant exactly negotiate with a player taken there. They are slotted and thats what you pay them. No choice really. 489428[/snapback] Here's a radical approach that will never happen: If you are stuck with a cap-busting top 5 pick, just keep passing 10 slots or so... you eventually get a lesser player, but you can save enough in cap space to seriously upgrade the quality of your FA's who, btw, will likely start and perform at a high level immediately!
Ramius Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 Here's a radical approach that will never happen: If you are stuck with a cap-busting top 5 pick, just keep passing 10 slots or so... you eventually get a lesser player, but you can save enough in cap space to seriously upgrade the quality of your FA's who, btw, will likely start and perform at a high level immediately! 489462[/snapback] that would never fly with the NFL. they'd figure it out, and then there'd be fines and potentially lost draft picks for trying to do that to the system. Also, you hafta deal with an agent who would claim his player should get paid at your original slot, not at the slot you took him, ala rivers last year.
Rico Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 Here's a radical approach that will never happen: If you are stuck with a cap-busting top 5 pick, just keep passing 10 slots or so... you eventually get a lesser player, but you can save enough in cap space to seriously upgrade the quality of your FA's who, btw, will likely start and perform at a high level immediately! 489462[/snapback] I don't think you keep passing, but you definitely try to maximize your value. Maybe TD tried to trade down but found no takers; that's cool & totally understandable. But you don't take a RT at #4 if you know you're going to have to pay that kind of jack, you just don't. I campaigned for Roy Williams back then, but you don't pay a safety that kind of $$$ either., John Henderson would've been a sweet pick and good value... though we probably would've taken Haynesworth instead. And everyone thought Freeney was a reach when the Colts took him, there's no way he was going #4. Like I said, it's all hindsight now anyways.. I don't want to piss all over MW again, I did that enough his first 2-1/3 years... but his ridiculous contract is the biggest reason why the OL continues to suck.
jester43 Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 jester, i know that you know a bunch about bringin in athletes to a team, but i have to disagree a little bit. I have to say that TD was right w/ winfield and replacing him with McGee and to a lesser degree Posey for Eddie Robinson. The fact of the matter is that the Bills are overpaying certain players ie) Teague and the safeties(two of the highest at their positions). Also, with some very high salaries on the starters, the depth of the team has been compromised. Thus , this creates problems when injuries occur and we are left to watch an overmatched player get run over like jerman or bannan. By the way how does your team look for this year? 489434[/snapback] our women are currently ranked 7th in D3. we won our conference meet today and broke our own record for best score at the conference championship meet...we went 1-2-3-5-7 for an 18 point total. our men were 2nd in the same meet. they're not a dominant team like the women are this year, but they turned in a solid performance, and we were very proud of them, nonetheless. thanks for asking! as far as TDis concerned, the stuff you mention is only a small part of the problem. i agree with the poster who said we were sort of stuck with williams' salary. but the bottom line is, if you are going to build a perrennial contender, you need to do it in the mid to late rounds anyway. in today's NFL, you MUST find guys who are solid pros and not stiffs. look at all the #2 and #3 round guys we have on our DL, and how BAD it is! i am not saying it's necessarily easy to do, but donohoe has not drafted enough good guys to make this a contending team. after five years, i think he's proven he's not the man for the job.
Bill from NYC Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 how can you say this? MW may be overpaid for the way he's played, but he was the #4 overall pick...you cant exactly negotiate with a player taken there. They are slotted and thats what you pay them. No choice really. 489428[/snapback] The following is NOT a post about the offensive line. I am responding to the above post which defends the judgement of TD. >>>>>MW may be overpaid for the way he's played, but he was the #4 overall pick...<<<<< Players selected to be Right Tackles are just NOT taken at #4. Please, look THIS over and see how many players who were slotted as RTs were taken even in the top ten. It doesn't happen. Your post seems to deflect blame away from TD for an unorthodox pick which can only be viewed as a complete whiff. Yes, an utter mistake which has drained this franchise of much needed cap space which could have been used to sign/retain players who can play good, consistent football. This obscene contract has necessitated the signing of castoffs from losing teams. Gandy can imo be described as uneventful at best. Anderson is a laughable sad sack who, ala Jerry Ostroski, cannot get out of his stance before being either soundly beaten, forced to jump offsides or hold. On draft days, TD has gladly passed over the likes of Steinbach and Hutchinson; two of the greatest OGs in the NFL, yet he pounced all over a RT with a chronic ankle problem, off field issues, and a weight problem. Defend this idiocy as you will but you TD alibis ring hollow.
San-O Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 The following is NOT a post about the offensive line. I am responding to the above post which defends the judgement of TD. >>>>>MW may be overpaid for the way he's played, but he was the #4 overall pick...<<<<< Players selected to be Right Tackles are just NOT taken at #4. Please, look THIS over and see how many players who were slotted as RTs were taken even in the top ten. It doesn't happen. Your post seems to deflect blame away from TD for an unorthodox pick which can only be viewed as a complete whiff. Yes, an utter mistake which has drained this franchise of much needed cap space which could have been used to sign/retain players who can play good, consistent football. This obscene contract has necessitated the signing of castoffs from losing teams. Gandy can imo be described as uneventful at best. Anderson is a laughable sad sack who, ala Jerry Ostroski, cannot get out of his stance before being either soundly beaten, forced to jump offsides or hold. On draft days, TD has gladly passed over the likes of Steinbach and Hutchinson; two of the greatest OGs in the NFL, yet he pounced all over a RT with a chronic ankle problem, off field issues, and a weight problem. Defend this idiocy as you will but you TD alibis ring hollow. 489517[/snapback] I've tried to make this pont, however some people always seem to go to the "he was slotted to make that money" card, which is ridiculous. Also did some research going back ten years, and found only 3 RTs taken in the first round, top ten picks.
Orton's Arm Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 Okay, then the Patriots have been neglecting their offensive line as well. 2 out of 14 in the last five years...Both those two are starting, with two of their starters players that were UDFAs, one was a second day pick.The Atlanta Falcons starting line's top pick is a fifth rounder... 489407[/snapback] The Patriots have a strongly defined philosophy about what they are looking for in an offensive lineman. The same is true of the Falcons. The Patriots are looking for character, toughness, desire, intelligence, etc. more than athletic ability. The Falcons are looking for Broncos-like offensive linemen that are smaller and faster than most teams want. If you are looking for something different than what everyone else is looking for, chances are better that you'll find it later on in the draft. How many second day picks or undrafted free agents have become permant starters for the Bills' line under Donahoe? I count exactly zero. Maybe that will change with the help of Jim McNally. That man seems to have a clear philosophy about what he wants an offensive lineman to be. Thanks largely to his influence, it looks like Duke Preston will be the first second-day pick to become a permanent starter during TD's era.
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 The following is NOT a post about the offensive line. I am responding to the above post which defends the judgement of TD. >>>>>MW may be overpaid for the way he's played, but he was the #4 overall pick...<<<<< Players selected to be Right Tackles are just NOT taken at #4. Please, look THIS over and see how many players who were slotted as RTs were taken even in the top ten. It doesn't happen. Your post seems to deflect blame away from TD for an unorthodox pick which can only be viewed as a complete whiff. Yes, an utter mistake which has drained this franchise of much needed cap space which could have been used to sign/retain players who can play good, consistent football. This obscene contract has necessitated the signing of castoffs from losing teams. Gandy can imo be described as uneventful at best. Anderson is a laughable sad sack who, ala Jerry Ostroski, cannot get out of his stance before being either soundly beaten, forced to jump offsides or hold. On draft days, TD has gladly passed over the likes of Steinbach and Hutchinson; two of the greatest OGs in the NFL, yet he pounced all over a RT with a chronic ankle problem, off field issues, and a weight problem. Defend this idiocy as you will but you TD alibis ring hollow. 489517[/snapback] Ypu are correct that players picked to play right tackle do not take in the amount he got at that slot. The obvious answer actually is that the Bills were clearly looking to move MW to the left tackle slot where players do take down that much money rather than the stupid notion that the plan all along was to simply keep him at RT and overay him. Do you or anyone else believe that this RT thing was the plan all along? TD can be faulted certainly because he gets the big bucks to take this whining from fans. The question really is was it reasonable for TD and the Bills to take the risk which did not work out that MW would make this move. It didn't work out and that is a fact so he should not have screwed up, but I think a variety of facts made this a reasonable thing to do its just too bad it did not work out. Specifically: 1. One of the big problems for having an RT make the junp to LT is the mental hurdle it involves having to protect the QBs blindside. However, this was not a hurdle at all because TX had a left handed QB and MW was assigned to the RT slot and did it well in college and demonstrated that blindside responsibility was no problem for him. 2. Thous the mental aspect of the game was no problem, there is a physical wuestione whether a player will be just as effective swiching positions. Though this needs to be trained, it was not an unreasonable risk to take. At the combine, MW tested out as showing great agility for such a big guy. It was not umreasonable hope at all that just as players switch positions on the OL with some frequency and succeed that MW had: A. Ni problem guarding the QB blindside in college. B. Had been a top-level performer in college who might well make the same shift that a less talented player Jennings made to become an LT after not playing the position before. C. Had demonstrated both strength and agility at the combine so that particularly if he was allowed to make the shift slowly by starting at RT the shift was not impossible at all. 3. I do not know whether Texas flipped their whole O with a left-handed QB and moved the TE to the left side. However, if they did and MW had experience and produced good collegiate results not only guarding the QB blindside but playing without help to his outside, then i see few problems beyond reps and dealing with the bigger hurdle of becoming a pro to having him shift. If he was used at TX to having the TE to his side, the the shift to LT is more difficult but still has and can be done. 4. Who else would you have taken. If folks want to advocate that we should have taken the other LT choice Bryant McKinnie this would be stupid sense he has been aunimpressive on the field and an even bigger disaster than MW's meltdown after his Mom died (understandable but not condonable). Overall, MWs career strikes me as: 1. Rookie year- a good start as he provided goof runblocking for an RB who qualified for the Pro Bowl. The pass blocking was not good but a lot of this in my mind had to do with the lack of escapability shown by Bledsoe. Gilbrude also was intractable in his offensive scheme and did not do some elementary things wjicj MM/TC did to improve Bledsoe's play: A. Parcells got Bledsoe to the SB by saying everytime Bledsoe went into his familiar pat just throw the damn ball. MM does not have the personality and record to cajole players into change like Parcells. However this technocrats use of an alm clock in practice to remind Bledsoe to just throw the damn ball rather than awaiting the sack I think was a big part of Bledsoe improving his 2004 performance over his putrid play in 2002. MW and the OL directly benefited from this shift with far lower sack totals. B, TC realzed that though Bledsoe will never be mistaken for Michael Vick and running is not his greatest talent, that you still have to run him occaisionally. Bledsoe is a bi boy who can take a hit and it in fact is better to have him pounded 5-10 yards upfield with the potential to slide rather than get pounded as a target with a sack 5-10 yards in his backfield, The need that safeties and LBs had to wait a minute to make sure the QB craw was not coming was quite helpful in stopping opponents from selling out to the blitz as they did under Gilbride because they had no fear of the QB draw. C. MM/TC took away some of Bledsoe's audible ability. This simplified things (helful to Bledsoe who is a stud player but subject to mental brain cramps when he overloads. Also Bledsoe had too much confidence in his rifle arm and the Bills ended up running only pass plays on 3rd down in short yardage as a pass-happy Gikbride called too many passes and Bledsoe apparently audibled out of the few run plays called. D. Bledsoe has great ball handling skills and actually ran the dipsey doodle of taking a pitch back from WM and firing to an open Evan or Moulds quite well in 2004. In addition to getting a few TDs, this play again forced the D to sit back rather than sell out to the rush. E. WM developed and showed far more speed than TH and a powerful stiff arm which resulted in LBs looking for the wide run rather than selling out on the blitz. All of this benefited MW whose play greatly improved last season as he got back in shape after his minicamp meltdown. Overall MW showed great promise his first yeat though he was far from perfect. 2. Secod year- MW did not progress and may have even regressed as this youngster still needed teaching but instead was put into a position were he had to coordinate with and teach Pacillo. Add to that Kevin Killdrive refused to vary his O and everyone had tons of film on how to stop it, stats showing its tendencies at various down and distances, and a blueprint from Weis and BB on how to beat the Bills. 3. Third year- MW melted down in minicamp with the understandable but not condonable meltdown in his game. JMac save his butt though with a carrot and stick approach that praised MW when he did well such as being rewarded with a game ball in a sack free game where he faced an effective sack artist much of the day and threatening to move him insde to G where even if he played well it would likely cost him big. This move looked doubtfuk to me as MWs problems seemed to me to be with stunts and pro moves inside because lining up next to two now cut players Sullivan and Pacillo he had no where near the traing in becomin a vet all youngsters need. Thanks to JMac's guidance he had turned his game around. The big problem though was with JJ moving into FA status this was the obvious time to move MW over, but his lost year for the most part ended this possiblity. Fourth year- MW did show up in canp a few pounds lighter and ready to go. Unfortuantely he has suffered a high ankle sprain and other injuries which to me makes him a bust unless he turns around his fortunes big time in our last 9 games. The way his salary has been handled has been interesting, His cap hit this year was lowered a bit from the massive $9.7 million hit he picked up in his #4 slot but the Bills still have a significant hit from him 2005. I wou;d not be shocked if the Bills moved part of his salary to later years by turning his base pay into bonus. However, they may have not turned a larger amount into bonus which would be accelerated into one year in 2006 or 7 if he is cut before next season. His performace in the last 9 regular season games are likely to make a difference in whether they give up on him or not. The vast expansion of the salary cap next year when the tV money kicks in would still leave this acceleration as a rough hit to take, but would make it doable. Overall, a detailed look at this case is one of failure (so far and the rest of the season may tell the tale) but it simply foolish to not recognize that we almost cetainly planned to jump him to LT and as it stands uncontroverted by anything but fact free opinions TDs estimate that 50% of first round choices disappoint in terms of meeting expectations. My sense is MW was a reasonable try but unfortunately he is one of the half which disappoints.
Rico Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 Overall, MWs career strikes me as: 1. Rookie year- a good start as he provided goof runblocking for an RB who qualified for the Pro Bowl. The pass blocking was not good but a lot of this in my mind had to do with the lack of escapability shown by Bledsoe. Gilbrude also was intractable in his offensive scheme and did not do some elementary things wjicj MM/TC did to improve Bledsoe's play: A. Parcells got Bledsoe to the SB by saying everytime Bledsoe went into his familiar pat just throw the damn ball. MM does not have the personality and record to cajole players into change like Parcells. However this technocrats use of an alm clock in practice to remind Bledsoe to just throw the damn ball rather than awaiting the sack I think was a big part of Bledsoe improving his 2004 performance over his putrid play in 2002. MW and the OL directly benefited from this shift with far lower sack totals. B, TC realzed that though Bledsoe will never be mistaken for Michael Vick and running is not his greatest talent, that you still have to run him occaisionally. Bledsoe is a bi boy who can take a hit and it in fact is better to have him pounded 5-10 yards upfield with the potential to slide rather than get pounded as a target with a sack 5-10 yards in his backfield, The need that safeties and LBs had to wait a minute to make sure the QB craw was not coming was quite helpful in stopping opponents from selling out to the blitz as they did under Gilbride because they had no fear of the QB draw. C. MM/TC took away some of Bledsoe's audible ability. This simplified things (helful to Bledsoe who is a stud player but subject to mental brain cramps when he overloads. Also Bledsoe had too much confidence in his rifle arm and the Bills ended up running only pass plays on 3rd down in short yardage as a pass-happy Gikbride called too many passes and Bledsoe apparently audibled out of the few run plays called. D. Bledsoe has great ball handling skills and actually ran the dipsey doodle of taking a pitch back from WM and firing to an open Evan or Moulds quite well in 2004. In addition to getting a few TDs, this play again forced the D to sit back rather than sell out to the rush. E. WM developed and showed far more speed than TH and a powerful stiff arm which resulted in LBs looking for the wide run rather than selling out on the blitz. All of this benefited MW whose play greatly improved last season as he got back in shape after his minicamp meltdown. Overall MW showed great promise his first yeat though he was far from perfect. 489558[/snapback] I think you cut-and-pasted from the wrong old rant.
BillnutinHouston Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 Okay, then the Patriots have been neglecting their offensive line as well. 2 out of 14 in the last five years...Both those two are starting, with two of their starters players that were UDFAs, one was a second day pick.The Atlanta Falcons starting line's top pick is a fifth rounder... 489407[/snapback] If you guys don't think TD and other GMs haven't analyzed (to death) how the Patriots have drafted and studied their trends, you're crazy.
Ramius Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 The following is NOT a post about the offensive line. I am responding to the above post which defends the judgement of TD. >>>>>MW may be overpaid for the way he's played, but he was the #4 overall pick...<<<<< Players selected to be Right Tackles are just NOT taken at #4. Please, look THIS over and see how many players who were slotted as RTs were taken even in the top ten. It doesn't happen. Your post seems to deflect blame away from TD for an unorthodox pick which can only be viewed as a complete whiff. Yes, an utter mistake which has drained this franchise of much needed cap space which could have been used to sign/retain players who can play good, consistent football. This obscene contract has necessitated the signing of castoffs from losing teams. Gandy can imo be described as uneventful at best. Anderson is a laughable sad sack who, ala Jerry Ostroski, cannot get out of his stance before being either soundly beaten, forced to jump offsides or hold. On draft days, TD has gladly passed over the likes of Steinbach and Hutchinson; two of the greatest OGs in the NFL, yet he pounced all over a RT with a chronic ankle problem, off field issues, and a weight problem. Defend this idiocy as you will but you TD alibis ring hollow. 489517[/snapback] Actually Bill, i wasnt defending TD for picking a RT at number 4. I was saying that you have to pay MW that much because thats where you took him, plain and simple. I'm not defending TD, because i thought we'd be seeing Mike Williams starting at LT right now. i thought that was the plan all along. I agree, picking a RT at #4 is stupid, unless you plan to move him to LT, or have a left handed QB. For the record, i wanted bryant mckinnie at #4.
finknottle Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 :Maybe that will change with the help of Jim McNally. That man seems to have a clear philosophy about what he wants an offensive lineman to be. Thanks largely to his influence, it looks like Duke Preston will be the first second-day pick to become a permanent starter during TD's era. 489522[/snapback] What is that philosophy? What is his proto-type OL guy? (I'm not knocking him, I just don't see a pattern yet in who he's bringing in, unless you consider it to be run blocking at the expense of pass protection...)
Orton's Arm Posted October 30, 2005 Posted October 30, 2005 What is that philosophy? What is his proto-type OL guy? 489652[/snapback] I believe it's similar to New England's. That's just based on hearing things here and there, so I could be wrong about this.
Recommended Posts