What was TD's best move for the Bills?

[WhitnerIsAGod]

Best move was out of One Bills Drive.

 

His best move for building a competitive NFL team was bringing in Spikes, by far. If he hadn't done that, he might not have lasted even 5 years.

 

I'm not surprised the Peerless trade is considered his "best move" by many.

 

But, in terms of football production, it was a stupid move. Peerless, Moulds, and Bledsoe had a record setting and very productive year. So rather than keep the trio together, Donahoe pinched Ralph's pennies and decided to break up the combination rather than figure out a way to keep it together. Afterall, Josh Reed, like Losman, was clearly ready for prime time. And, he got a player that wouldn't be able to play a down for at least 1 full season as compensation.

[beerme1]

I assume that it is me you are refering to saying I railed against folks for talking about TD. I assume your are correct but I do not even remember saying this/  However, since I did, boy was I dumb before. 

698993[/snapback]

 

You are correct. Why two weeks or so ago you are ripping people for continuing to talk about TD and now here you are with two thrads and polls asking for more info.

Yes I agree dumb before. Dumber now!

[finknottle]

If cap management were so easy, then why doesn;t everyone do it well and why do so many teams still do it poorly?

 

698570[/snapback]

 

Just out of curiosity, who do you think is doing it poorly?

 

Every year I see a bunch of teams rediculously over, and they cut a few and restructure a few and they are right back in it. Once in awhile you see a team take a big step back ala the Bills and 49rs, but I fail to see the difference between a good firesale and a bad one. If anything, its the teams like the Redskins that are handling salary cap jail well, and TD who didn't.

[Larry Playfair]

Just out of curiosity, who do you think is doing it poorly?

 

Every year I see a bunch of teams rediculously over, and they cut a few and restructure a few and they are right back in it.  Once in awhile you see a team take a big step back ala the Bills and 49rs, but I fail to see the difference between a good firesale and a bad one.  If anything,  its the teams like the Redskins that are handling salary cap jail well, and TD who didn't.

699091[/snapback]

 

The skins are playing the game very well, but thye are betting that the cap will go up every year to cover their excessive long term contracts. So far they have been correct.

[Pyrite Gal]

Just out of curiosity, who do you think is doing it poorly?

 

Every year I see a bunch of teams rediculously over, and they cut a few and restructure a few and they are right back in it.  Once in awhile you see a team take a big step back ala the Bills and 49rs, but I fail to see the difference between a good firesale and a bad one.  If anything,  its the teams like the Redskins that are handling salary cap jail well, and TD who didn't.

699091[/snapback]

It would take a bit of research to get specific, but prior to the deal being reached on the CBA, there were a number of players who were cut to save cap room whom the teams were relunctant to cut but they had to,

 

This was an extraordinary time due to the CBA uncertainties but I count anyone cuttiing a player for cap reasons whom they did not want to cut as poor cap management.

 

An example of a team who has not handled the cap well in my view would be the TN Titans, they gave large contracts out without an extraordinary return in terms of Ws. Even with the McNair cut (leaving them with Volek and vince Young they not only finished with a worse record than the Bills this year but have afair shot doing it again this year). NYJ has also been notoriously bad at cap management and I think in part Edwards escaped to a better situation as they have a few years of cap work ahesd of them and they just had to chop a lof of their OL to make it work.

 

A lot of this assessment is really retrospective because the cap situation has changed quite abit as teams are better at managing it now than they we when TD was hired 5 years ago. I think it is not unreasonable to say in this league where success is imitated that TD deserves credit for some trailblazing moves not normally done which other teams likely are immitating as part of the cap management example he provided.

 

He deserved flat out to be fired because he did not meet the bottom line of getting the Ws to get to the playoffs during his reign of error. However, though this true, what some fail to see that though he did fail in the big picture it does not mean he did everything wrong. In fact, when it came to reading the market, and managingthe business side, TD was one of the best.

 

Personally, if I had a choice Id rather see him win on the field and screw the business sidde, but we have no choice.

 

For the Bills, even though there were cuts at that time such as Milloy, I think actually we wanted to get rid of this player as his heavy hitting style was more appropriate to the zone blitz than to the Cover 2.

[Orton's Arm]

Short-term moves

- Signing Pro Bowler Adams for below market rate

- First year performance of Bledsoe to replace RJ

 

Neutral/Other

- Tagging Peerless and trading this UFA for a #1

- Waiting out the market and getting a 3rd for Henry

- Acquiring WM and managing his rehab resulting in him starting

- In 2001 trading down the 1st and still getting the 1st CB taken

- FA acquisition of NFL tackle leader last 5 years Fletcher

 

Long-term moves

- Extending Schobel long term

- Managing us out of cap hell a year earlier than expected

- Acquiring major FA TKO

- Acquiring and long-term signing of Pro Bowler Moorman

- 2nd day drafting of Pro Bowler McGee

 

Long-term subtractions

- Letting Antoine Winfield walk very early in his career

- Cutting Antowain Smith

- The first round pick we gave up for Bledsoe

- Letting Jennings walk after four years

 

I divided up Pyrite Gal's list of achievements into three categories: quick fixes, long-term building, and those which didn't necessarily fall into either category. Take the fact the Bills traded away Peerless for a #1. In hindsight this worked out well because Price developed an eye problem. But at the time, it was a decision to trade away one young, promising player (Peerless) to acquire another via the draft. That's a neutral decision; one which seemed positive in hindsight due to the unexpected eye problem Peerless developed.

 

Because TD was given five years of draft picks to work with, it's natural to expect some positive results. McGee, for example, is the only starter-worthy player TD found in five years' worth of second day draft picks.

 

You'll also notice a lot of TD's successes involved RBs. He traded down in 2001, and used the extra draft pick to take Travis Henry. Because he'd added Henry, he cut Antowain Smith. Then TD decided Henry wouldn't last forever, so he drafted McGahee with the pick he got from trading away Peerless. Then he traded Henry away for a third. Of the success stories mentioned, four involve running backs: the Clements trade-down, the trading away of Peerless, the drafting of McGahee, and the trading away of Travis. Give a different GM a team with Antowain Smith but no offensive line, and he might spend a little less time looking for success stories at RB, and more time looking for them elsewhere.

[Dibs]

McGee, for example, is the only starter-worthy player TD found in five years' worth of second day draft picks.   

699189[/snapback]

 

Just on this point, Moorman & Peters were undrafted FAs & therefore should probably be counted(or at least factored in) with his second day picks.

There is also a few players who might yet develop in the near future.

 

Don't read this as a defense of TDs 2nd day drafting...he clearly shows a bad record...I just thought this should be included in the assessment.

 

Perhaps his best move might be Moorman & Peters. 1 pro-bowler & 1 potential from UDFA is pretty good.

[Orton's Arm]

Just on this point, Moorman & Peters were undrafted FAs & therefore should probably be counted(or at least factored in) with his second day picks.

UDFAs are an entirely separate source of value from second-day draft picks. I agree Moorman is very good, and Peters had some good games last year. But other teams find starters through UDFAs too. Had TD done a spectacular job with UDFAs, I could see it compensating for a weak job on the second day of the draft. But a Pro Bowl punter and the chance of a starting lineman isn't necessarily that much better than what other teams have achieved with UDFAs over the last five years.

[Dibs]

Had TD done a spectacular job with UDFAs, I could see it compensating for a weak job on the second day of the draft.

699209[/snapback]

*sigh* I did say...

...Don't read this as a defense of TDs 2nd day drafting...he clearly shows a bad record...

699198[/snapback]

But a Pro Bowl punter and the chance of a starting lineman isn't necessarily that much better than what other teams have achieved with UDFAs over the last five years.

699209[/snapback]

I don't know about that. How many other teams get a pro-bowler & a legit starter(future ProBowler?) out of UDFA in a 5 year period?

I literally don't know but I thought this sounded quite out of the ordinary.

[JAMIEBUF12]

td's best move is when he moved out of the general managers position!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! actually to be fair he did have a few good moves just his weakness was getting puppets to coach and not building a playoff type oline.

[Pyrite Gal]

*sigh* I did say...

I don't know about that.  How many other teams get a pro-bowler & a legit starter(future ProBowler?) out of UDFA in a 5 year period? 

I literally don't know but I thought this sounded quite out of the ordinary.

699214[/snapback]

 

When did we sign Rashad Baker he was #1 on the depth chart at free safety at one point and I think this happened because he was the best we had rather than injury (but I may be wrong). He is no longer a starter because we got Vincent (maybe he moved up when Vincent was injured) but is still 2nd on the depth chart and while it is in no way his best move it is a positive that if we are adding up contributing UDFA 's acquired on draft day he may be part of the list.

[Orton's Arm]

*sigh* I did say...

I don't know about that.  How many other teams get a pro-bowler & a legit starter(future ProBowler?) out of UDFA in a 5 year period? 

I literally don't know but I thought this sounded quite out of the ordinary.

Peters had some good games in 2005, just as Mike Williams did in 2004. It's a tad early to say that Peters will be at least average for a starting RT.

 

As for Baker, if he can be beaten out by Vincent, he's not really the guy you want starting at FS. Hence the drafting of Ko Simpson.

[RJsackedagain]

Since none of TD's moves ended up amounting to anything while he was here (ie. playoffs and beyond), I will choose to look at how they will impact the future... and I think extending McGee last year to a relatively cheap contract was an very outstanding move. Schobel is very solid, but McGee is a difference-maker, on ST and at CB.

 

Getting TKO to sign here was big, but I have to see how he comes back first... I'm pretty sure McGee will give us more than 2 great years.

698425[/snapback]

I think his best move was getting fired by Ralph!

[Bill from NYC]

Peters had some good games in 2005, just as Mike Williams did in 2004.  It's a tad early to say that Peters will be at least average for a starting RT. 

699271[/snapback]

 

There is a difference.

 

MW was a mauling, gargantuan RT who, due to his size and strength, was simply able to maul defenders in college. This is hard to do in the NFL, unless your name is Erik Williams or Bob Brown. The cost? A #4 pick of a draft.

 

Peters is a converted TE who is fast, strong and agile. If he is 1/2 as good as McNally says, he will certainly be a good LEFT Tackle down the road. His cost? An undrafted free agent.

 

I am the very last person on this board to try to convince you how great the Bills OL is, but Peters is certainly a bright spot. If he stays healthy, there is no reason to not expect him to improve.

I hope that if he improves as I expect, Marv will be able to lock him up long term.

[Orton's Arm]

Peters is a converted TE who is fast, strong and agile. If he is 1/2 as good as McNally says, he will certainly be a good LEFT Tackle down the road. His cost? An undrafted free agent.

I agree there's potential. But Peters has little or no experience at left tackle at all. In some people's minds--not yours, but some--he's already a Pro Bowler at the position. Players like Rob Johnson, Drew Bledsoe, and Mike Williams have shown us flashes of good play, only to leave us disappointed in the long run. While Peters has done enough to give us hope, he's still got a lot to prove.

[The Jokeman]

Just on this point, Moorman & Peters were undrafted FAs & therefore should probably be counted(or at least factored in) with his second day picks.

There is also a few players who might yet develop in the near future.

 

Don't read this as a defense of TDs 2nd day drafting...he clearly shows a bad record...I just thought this should be included in the assessment.

 

Perhaps his best move might be Moorman & Peters.  1 pro-bowler & 1 potential from UDFA is pretty good.

699198[/snapback]

Actually Moorman was not an UDFA. He was a FA as he spent time in camp with the Seahawks prior to NFL Europe and finally here. Our scouts for pro players (not sure if John Guy was here at time so that's why not mentioning him) should be given kudos for that signing. Of course Donahoe had to ultimately sign and re-sign Moorman so guess he does get a nod for that.

[Pyrite Gal]

Peters had some good games in 2005, just as Mike Williams did in 2004.  It's a tad early to say that Peters will be at least average for a starting RT. 

 

As for Baker, if he can be beaten out by Vincent, he's not really the guy you want starting at FS.  Hence the drafting of Ko Simpson.

699271[/snapback]

 

I certainly have no sense at all that Baker should start for us, I just mentioned it as a curiosityas part of a "fair and balanced" assessment of TD's reign of error for us.

 

Another issue I find a bit humorous is why some folks seem to have such a negative impression of TV's work at FS ranging from those who said that for age and cap reasons he should be cut to the implication in your post that being beaten out for FS by TV is a sign of weakness. I disagree for these football based reasons.

 

TV certainly is well into the backside of his career and is old enough that he may one day suddenly hit the wall and his career for us as a starting quality FS are done. However, that day fortunately is not here yet as:

 

1. He tied for the team lead in INTs last year with McGee.

2. He tied for the team lead in fumble recoveries (only a paltry 2 but given even the best of the rest had only 1 the combination gives him the sole team lead in turnovers produced. This simply is a fact.

3. The switch to the Cover 2 plays to his strength of being more of a cover guy than a tackler (though he shows no fear of hitting also).

4. The idea of cutting him rather than Milloy is particularly non-footbsll thinking since in fact it is the zone blitz which we are abandoining which plays to Milloy's style. It would also have been cap silly as Milloy's cut provided the Bills with arounf a couple of million in cap advantage while a Vincent cut only provides a couple of hundred K.

5. Even though TV has certainly lost a step or two in speed due to age, folks seem to ignore the fact he had a step or two greater speed to lose given that he had enough speed at his peak to cover the quickest of opposing WRs. The move to S from CB which he initiated (unlike mpst athletes who think about themselves rather than the team first) already demands less flat out speed than the CB position.

6. I hope TV does not suffer from some sudden play quality outsge (no sign of that as he led the Bills in combined turnovers last year) because he has an even more critical role to play for the Bills given all the young DBs we acquired.

 

Whitner, Yobouty and Simpson can do a lot worse than learning the game and vet coverage techniques from Vincent. Not only will the switch to the Cover 2 likely extend his use to the Bills (and if we use the Tampa 2 which divides the centerfield duties into thirds of the field rather than half it even plays to TV's demographics even more) but our desire to train the youngsters in coverage technique (particularly Yobouty who is assessed having first round senior physical skills but a still should be in college as he has a junior or sophmore level of football intellect leading to episodically outstanding but inconsistent play), but off the field TV has commanded the respect of his peers such that he was voted President of the NFLPA and has led the way in organizing post football business classes for fotball players at an Ivy-League business school (TKO for example has said they are great).

 

My sense is that there are some folks who have bought the anti-union rap given by some ideologues that they actually probably dislike TV as the head of the NFLPA.

 

So what.

 

The key for him teaching rooks the better way to be teammates is that the NFLPA under Upshaw, TV, and a host of bright lawyers delivered a deal which not only builds on the partnership they created with the NFL in the first CBA, but made it clear that the NFLPA are the majority partners in this arrangement getting 59.5% of the total revenues (this strikes me as appropriate since what the team owners provide is capital and history and with potential new owners there are tons of entities that can provide capital. The historic legacy which folks like Ralph, Al Davis and Wellington Mara have provided the game which is important and this should not be simply totally dismissed.

 

However, like or not, the Grim Reaper eventually comes and visits us all and the unbreakable rule is no one gets out of here of alive. Not only will Ralph, Al, and the other old guard follow the trail blazed by Wellington Mara, but it is appropriate in my opinion that the players are in fact the majority partners as I might pay to se Ralph and Al put on shoulder pads and try to beat the tar out of each other once, but really the players are the difficult to replace part of the game and any source of capital can be replaced by another rich entity.

 

No one can replace the history and early risks Ralph brought to the game, but like it or not he will die so having the NFLPA step up to be majority partners over the new $ like Dan Snyder strikes me as the best thing for traditionalists to advocate since in the end we cannot keep Ralph around beyond his time.

[BoondckCL]

I would say his best move was in 2001 when he did trade down but not for getting the first corner taken still. He traded down, got the guy he wanted and got Travis Henry. That's when i put all of my faith in him and thought that we would be great.

[BobbyC81]

I was torn between tagging/trading Peerless and drafting McGee, but I'd have to say McGee right now. So far, he's earned his worth as a KR and is getting better as a CB.

 

The #1 pick we got for Peerless (McGahee) is right up there, but I'm not so sure of Willis as a mature player just yet. I'll give him 2006 to really judge him, but I have a feeling he won't be in Buffalo once his contract is up.

698711[/snapback]

 

 

You can actually look at the Peerless trade in two ways. First there is the trade to get a 1st round pick. I think that turned out to be a great move.

 

Some may say you need to evaluate what was done with that 1st round pick. I say weigh just the trade and take the use of the pick separately.

 

Thatbeingsaid, the use of the pick is still up in the air to me. It was used in a risk on McGahee. He has recovered from that knee injury but the overall package he provides still has yet to be determined. I'd want a couple more years to evaluate that choice. The 2004 season was not enough to evaluate. If he can have a comparable season in the next two, then the pick was a good one.

[finknottle]

You can actually look at the Peerless trade in two ways.  First there is the trade to get a 1st round pick.  I think that turned out to be a great move.

 

Some may say you need to evaluate what was done with that 1st round pick. I say weigh just the trade and take the use of the pick separately. 

 

Thatbeingsaid, the use  of the pick is still up in the air to me. It was used in a risk on McGahee. He has recovered from that knee injury but the overall package he provides still has yet to be determined.  I'd want a couple more years to evaluate that choice.  The 2004 season was not enough to evaluate.  If he can have a comparable season in the next two, then the pick was a good one.

699344[/snapback]

 

I'm not so quick to give him a pass on 2003. Granted he looked good in 2004; IMO he was MIA in 2005. So are you saying that a first round pick - getting you five years of service for five years of salary - is good if you get out of it 3 good years, one poor year, and an injured reserve year? For an impact position, that sounds like a break-even at best to me.