Arkady Renko Posted April 8, 2006 Posted April 8, 2006 Agreed.Donahoe would have never let Moulds go in April for a campfodder pick. 656691[/snapback] He would have held Moulds until July, waited for a team to have an injury to a wide receiver and then traded him. And then we would have gone 5-11.
The Jokeman Posted April 8, 2006 Posted April 8, 2006 So who is left in free agency for either line? The only decent offensive lineman that I believe that is still available is Tutan Reyes, who is a guard from Carolina. 656687[/snapback] Reyas is still the best G out there. I still think former Jag OTs Ephraim Salaam or Mike Pearson be worth pursuing for depth purposes. Rex Tucker might be worth interesting too, as he was at his best under Jauron in Chicago and has worked with Fairchild in St Louis and could be a qualty backup at G.
dreadlox Posted April 8, 2006 Posted April 8, 2006 Handing JP the job and letting PhatPat/Jonas walk makes me beleive that he was playing for 2006 and that he would have made more effort to bring higher caliber players into the OLine mix this year. The discussion can never be more than speculation but I'm inclined to think that given that one more year he would have spent another Day1 pick (or possibly even 2) on the OLine as well as making a serious run at LBentley (who probably would ahve gone to Cleveburgh anyways); and would have had a nice looking OLine when the season started although you may be right in saying that was tom D's plan, i think it is a pretty flawed plan. a successful offense begins with a good line. looking at the good teams in the league proves that. big name skill players often leave their successful teams for lucrative deals elsewhere, and their former teams continue winning games. the loss of premier linemen, although sometimes overlooked , leaves a much bigger void in my opinion. losing a productive lineman also frequently creates a domino effect and can cause other members of the unit to struggle playing alongside unfamiliar and often less talented replacements. i think part of that is that consistency is needed along the o-line as they play not as five players but a cohesive unit. building a team around a young qb and skill players is laughable and the results are what we see now with this team. damn, i thought all my teflon tom angst was gone.
JoeF Posted April 8, 2006 Author Posted April 8, 2006 Thanks for the thanks, Dudes and you to CL... I am still trying to get over the image of JP coming up to Marv and saying "Hey Dude"....JP probably isn't hated, its more like.."Is this kid for real?" The entire culture of the operation at OBD has changed in 3 short months. I don't know what the results will be, but instead of big splash moves, open warfare with players, etc..the approach is understated and family like with Marv playing a Yoda like charachter... I was surprised that Clayton and Salisbury didn't ask about the status of the team given Ralph's comments and meetings the last few days but the subject was not broached.
jarthur31 Posted April 8, 2006 Posted April 8, 2006 This is the very thing the Bills website need to put up in the multimedia section. Good stuff.
Typical TBD Guy Posted April 8, 2006 Posted April 8, 2006 The discussion can never be more than speculation but I'm inclined to think that given that one more year he would have spent another Day1 pick (or possibly even 2) on the OLine as well as making a serious run at LBentley (who probably would ahve gone to Cleveburgh anyways); and would have had a nice looking OLine when the season started. 656721[/snapback] This topic, again? "Given ONE more year?" Yeah right, Simon. FIVE years were more than enough time for this arrogant, substandard prick of a GM to field a team capable of making the playoffs. Instead, we are now firmly mired with the dregs of the league (Lions, Cards, Texans) all because this stupid fugging piece of stojan GM had to show off on draft day for the past THREE seasons instead of landing us some solid, boring linemen. Now Marv has to clean up your hero's mess...which may take a couple seasons...and you have the cajones to rag on Marv for settling on a high 5th which you call "camp fodder," as if the draft doesn't exist beyond the fourth round? "A serious run at Bentley..." give me a fugging break.
Ozymandius Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 Thanks for posting this interview. I'm kind of confused, though, by what Marv meant when he said "they needed Moulds' cap money to build the lines properly". There are basically no unrestricted big money free agent linemen left. I would assume he'll go after Terrence Metcalf and maybe Tutan Reyes, but those are hardly expensive guys.
apuszczalowski Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 The discussion can never be more than speculation but I'm inclined to think that given that one more year he would have spent another Day1 pick (or possibly even 2) on the OLine as well as making a serious run at LBentley (who probably would ahve gone to Cleveburgh anyways); and would have had a nice looking OLine when the season started. 656721[/snapback] And then in 2 years the lines would suck again cause he would have broght in a bunch of aging vets that would have made them look good for about a year and then show their age. We have seen what TD thought were good linemen (Bennie Anderson), I don't think e would have found much better this year. Here are some of the top FA Linemen and if they are still available or if they have signed with a small description of them Tackles - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9054 Guards - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9055 Centres - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9056 Defensive Ends - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9057 Defensive Tackles - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9058 and the other Positions Linebacker - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9059 Corner back - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9060 Safety - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9061 Quarterback - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9049 Running Back - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9051 Wide Receiver - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9053 Tight End - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=9052 Special Teams - http://www.tsn.ca/nfl/feature.asp?fid=10647 Although their RB's include Travis Henry whom I have been told has not been released from the Titans and is signed through 2009
Ozymandius Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 Okay, other guys we could go after besides Metcalf and Reyes... Kindal Moorehead... restricted... small but good DT that fits the one-gap... we would give up a 5th-rounder for him James Reed... small, small DT but fits the one-gap Vince Manuwai...restricted... good, powerful guard... we would have to give up a 3rd rounder for him, which is pricy in a deep draft. Manuwai is the one guy that makes the most sense in the context of Marv's comments. I can see us overpaying him so that the Jags don't match and we get a Benny replacement.
apuszczalowski Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 I am all for going after the RFA's But according to the Experts on this board, its just a waste of time, unlike attempting to sign a centre who came out and said he wanted to play for his home town team over any other team after the season ended and signed shortly after the FA period began
Ozymandius Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 Marv just needs to put a poison pill in Manuwai's contract and kazam, we have a starting LG at the cost of a 3rd round draft pick. He can be creative with the poison pill, maybe something to do with the weather.
Buftex Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 I am all for going after the RFA's But according to the Experts on this board, its just a waste of time, unlike attempting to sign a centre who came out and said he wanted to play for his home town team over any other team after the season ended and signed shortly after the FA period began 656849[/snapback] I don't think anyone was objecting toward going after UFA's, just making the case that if you do, you have to offer them enough money, that their original team won't match, if you really want them. The Bills didn't really do that.
Simon Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 I'm having some pangs of guilt for hijacking Joe's thread so this will be my last entry here: Can't we meet in the middle here? Don't get me wrong Bill. I'm not saying Donahoe had done a good job on the OLine, far from it. It's just that when one considers his very lengthy history of assembling powerful Offensive lines I think that it was only a matter of time (a very short time) that he found the right combination here. With a high draft position to work with and plenty of cap room to play with I think he'd have taken a real run at solidifying the trenches. There was no need for the Bills to panic and go into a 4-12 type of rebuilding mode and I think one more year would have shown that. Nirvjam and I kept track last year. Do you know how many tackles Parrish broke? That's like saying "do you know how many guys Shelton juked last year?". Parrish's job isn't to break tackles, it's to catch the ball and make people miss. You are kidding, right? I mean how is letting your "starter of the future" get creamed on every other play for a season the right plan to build for the future? I don't think that getting Losman hammered was their plan. They couldn't anticipate Mike Williams suffering a season-ending injury, or Trey Teague's shoulder, or Chris Vilarial actually starting the season in the hospital. That's 3/5 of their starting OLine being rendered all but useless in the first month of the season. How on Earth do you plan for that? Instead of having the luxury of plugging in Jason Peters for the badly struggling BennieAnderson(which really was a poor acquisition) instead they were forced to field the kind of OLine that had not only Anderson, but also Jerman on the field with injured guys like Vilarial and Teague. Losing a bunch of their depth before the season even started just made matters even worse. the loss of premier linemen, although sometimes overlooked , leaves a much bigger void in my opinion. losing a productive lineman also frequently creates a domino effect and can cause other members of the unit to struggle playing alongside unfamiliar and often less talented replacements. You're right on the money, Lox. Now consider the fact that the Bills lost their starting LT(to a contract they rightfully refused to match)before the season, their starting RT in the first month, their starting RG opens the season in the hospital, their starting C has a shoulder injury and they've already lost a bunch of their depth in the preseason. That pretty much wipes out all your dominoes right there. Instead, we are now firmly mired with the dregs of the league (Lions, Cards, Texans) all because this stupid fugging piece of stojan GM had to show off on draft day The reason we're now mired with the dregs of the league is because our owner caved to fan pressure and lost highly regarded people, sending the message to other highly regarded people that Buffalo was no place you wanted to work. Then we hired a bunch of not-so-highly-regarded people who proceeded to get rid of guys like Moulds, Milloy, Adams and Williams. If we would have stood pat we'd have spent August getting ready to watch a run at a division title; instead we're going to spend it being laughed at by the rest of the league. But at least you won't have to deal with Donahoe's "arrogance", which is what really matters.
Dawgg Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 Tom, is that you? Donahoe was not arrogant, he just failed and failed miserably. Is he a bad executive? Of course not -- but he made a slew of dubious moves that have sent this franchise into a downward spiral during his tenure. As for your premonition that TD was making moves towards 2006? You couldn't be more wrong. He genuinely felt that Losman could lead that team to the playoffs -- and he was wrong... which is why he was shown the door. The reason we're now mired with the dregs of the league is because our owner caved to fan pressure and lost highly regarded people, sending the message to other highly regarded people that Buffalo was no place you wanted to work.Then we hired a bunch of not-so-highly-regarded people who proceeded to get rid of guys like Moulds, Milloy, Adams and Williams. If we would have stood pat we'd have spent August getting ready to watch a run at a division title; instead we're going to spend it being laughed at by the rest of the league. But at least you won't have to deal with Donahoe's "arrogance", which is what really matters. 657150[/snapback]
Typical TBD Guy Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 If we would have stood pat we'd have spent August getting ready to watch a run at a division title 657150[/snapback] You are beyond delusional. I, too, won't be commenting any more in Joe's hijacked thread because the topic of TD's "genius" has become a bloodied, decaying mess of a horse corpse. I have no doubt you are an intelligent person, so I wonder if you're saying such nonsense just to get a rise out of us TD haters? I'll end by saying that I gave TD 4 full seasons and an additional half off-season before I turned on him. I can only hope you're willing to give Marv at least 1.
JoeF Posted April 9, 2006 Author Posted April 9, 2006 I'm having some pangs of guilt for hijacking Joe's thread so this will be my last entry here: Damn Terrorist....like I care
Simon Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 Since Joe doesn't care........ he made a slew of dubious moves that have sent this franchise into a downward spiral during his tenure. From the day he was hired to the day he was fired, this franchise improved by 1000%. I can only hope you're willing to give Marv at least 1. I'll judge Marv the same way I've judged every other Bills GM. If he makes the team better I'll praise him, if he doesn't I'll look for the Bills to move on. He started off with a very good roster and a very good cap figure. So far all he's accomplished is to keep all that cap space while seriously weakening the Bills roster. Hooray?
Rico Posted April 9, 2006 Posted April 9, 2006 Then we hired a bunch of not-so-highly-regarded people who proceeded to get rid of guys like Moulds, Milloy, Adams and Williams.657150[/snapback] After last year though, I would bet that Milloy is the only one of those 4 that TD might have brought back.
Dawgg Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 1000%? What team have you been watching? I sure hope you don't deal with numbers in your everyday job! Perhaps he installed some key players at key positions -- that's what GMs are supposed to do. But they are also supposed to build "teams" that perform well together and have balance on both sides of the ball. And as an architect of a "team," he failed miserably. Going from 3-13 to 8-8 to 6-10 to 9-7 to a whopping 5-11 hardly qualifies as a 1000% improvement. Since Joe doesn't care........ From the day he was hired to the day he was fired, this franchise improved by 1000%. 657237[/snapback]
flomoe Posted April 10, 2006 Posted April 10, 2006 Thanks for posting this interview. I'm kind of confused, though, by what Marv meant when he said "they needed Moulds' cap money to build the lines properly". There are basically no unrestricted big money free agent linemen left. I would assume he'll go after Terrence Metcalf and maybe Tutan Reyes, but those are hardly expensive guys. 656830[/snapback] I have a thought about this quote by Marv and the fact that there aren't that many big money free agent linemen left. Is it possible, that the Bills and Texans somehow have discussed a first round trade and the Bills moving up and taking D'Brick? The Bills will need quite a bit of cap space to sign a #1 overall pick and the fact that Moulds went to the Texans for a 5th inclines me to think that maybe there might be more to that trade than what's on paper. Is it possible that there is some sort of "gentlemen's agreement" here? Just a thought. For some reason, I think that Marv and the Houston GM, can't think of his name off hand, have some background together but I'm not positive.
Recommended Posts