If OTA's are voluntary, why blame Willis?

[hamtenp]

I dont get it. Why blame any veteran if the camps are voluntary. And this horseshit about Willis missing out on all the new terminology is insane, Why are new techniques being taught at voluntary camps? They should be taught at mandatory meetings when all players are present. Dont blame any veteran for not attending these voluntary meetings. I agree with Willis. Let him enjoy his time off in Miami. if he does not perform in minicamp, then cut him.

[mcjeff215]

I dont get it. Why blame any veteran if the camps are voluntary. And this horseshit about Willis missing out on all the new terminology is insane, Why are new techniques being taught at voluntary camps? They should be taught at mandatory meetings when all players are present. Dont blame any veteran for not attending these voluntary meetings. I agree with Willis. Let him enjoy his time off in Miami. if he does not perform in minicamp, then cut him.

702861[/snapback]

 

 

You don't think the fact that he hasn't shown up at one of these things shows a bit of a lack of dedication? New coach, new staff, new GM, new players, new year.. one would think he would be more interested in his team; at least I would. Not to knock him or anything, but it does irk be a little.

 

Start teaching the new system as soon as possible. The XX% of players that show up will know it that much better.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

Willis hasn't shown-up for ANY OTA's ever. I was hoping that with a new coaching staff that that would change, but hey, if Edge is missing OTA's with Arizona, I can't really say too much. And I'm sure he got the new playbook and terminology.

[PromoTheRobot]

I dont get it. Why blame any veteran if the camps are voluntary. And this horseshit about Willis missing out on all the new terminology is insane, Why are new techniques being taught at voluntary camps? They should be taught at mandatory meetings when all players are present. Dont blame any veteran for not attending these voluntary meetings. I agree with Willis. Let him enjoy his time off in Miami. if he does not perform in minicamp, then cut him.

702861[/snapback]

Union rules make the OTA's optional. But there is an unspoken expectation between teams and players that if you are serious about playing, you'll be there. It's sort of like that scene in the movie Office Space between Jennifer Anniston and that dork restaurant manager

 

PTR

[Dawgg]

Edge is a proven vet. Willis is far from it.

 

if Edge is missing OTA's with Arizona, I can't really say too much.

702865[/snapback]

[Acantha]

I don't consider the fact that these guys aren't at the OTA's a big deal at all. The only player I was concerned with was Clements...and that wasn't showing up, it was just signing. Once he signed, he could go and work out, talk to coaches, get the playbook, etc...

 

You don't have to be at an OTA to hear the new terminology and learn plays. You can do that with a playbook. And there is going to be plenty of time to adjust and get comfotable in mandatory camps.

 

And that "unspoken expectation" is far more from the team than the players. The rookies "need" to be there. Would it be better if all the Vets were there? Sure, just not enough that it should be an issue. Weren't there years with GW that everyone showed up? Maybe even with MM, can't remember. How well did that turn out? 100% participation is good for nothing but headlines.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

Edge is a proven vet.  Willis is far from it.

That's no excuse. It's still a new team and totally unfamiliar coaches and players.

[LabattBlue]

Union rules make the OTA's optional.  But there is an unspoken expectation between teams and players that if you are serious about playing, you'll be there.

 

PTR

702913[/snapback]

I agree 100%. It's one thing to proclaim that I'm working out with the boys at UM, but it's completely different if you're hanging out on the set of NFL Total Access. There's a new goddam system to be learned and it appears that you just don't care.

 

 

If players have a legitimate reason for missing the OTA's fine, but what WM is doing is bull sh--.

[mcjeff215]

I agree 100%.  It's one thing to proclaim that I'm working out with the boys at UM, but it's completely different if you're hanging out on the set of NFL Total Access.  There's a new goddam system to be learned and it appears that you just don't care.

If players have a legitimate reason for missing the OTA's fine, but what WM is doing is bull sh--.

702974[/snapback]

 

 

I agree as well. If it was the same old crap under MM, it's no problem... but come on.. we've swapped coaching regimes. Look at the way our swordsmen came together as a team this year. This type of stuff doesn't breed that way of thinking.

[Lori]

I agree as well.  If it was the same old crap under MM, it's no problem... but come on.. we've swapped coaching regimes.  Look at the way our swordsmen came together as a team this year.  This type of stuff doesn't breed that way of thinking.

702979[/snapback]

Good point about the Sabres. How many of them skated together on a regular basis last offseason? (Or during the lockout, for the ones who didn't play overseas?)

 

Some relevant thoughts from a guy who knows something about football:

It's impressive that the Baltimore Ravens had a healthy turnout of about 80 players for their organized team activities. It's disappointing that they were expecting only about 30 to show up. Low expectations have become pretty common for OTA attendance. Why is it so difficult for teams to get players to participate, even if these are "voluntary" sessions? I know that players are able to keep in good physical shape by working out on their own away from their teams' respective headquarters. But why don't they see the obvious benefits of soaking up some extra knowledge from the coaches, who will have plenty of influence on their individual achievement, as well as team contribution, and getting an additional opportunity to hone their skills, timing and everything else that can be enhanced when working in a group environment? It's especially troublesome when teams with new coaches have a large number of no-shows.

 

NFL.com

[Pyrite Gal]

I agree 100%.  It's one thing to proclaim that I'm working out with the boys at UM, but it's completely different if you're hanging out on the set of NFL Total Access.  There's a new goddam system to be learned and it appears that you just don't care.

If players have a legitimate reason for missing the OTA's fine, but what WM is doing is bull sh--.

702974[/snapback]

 

If it has no real world effect I'm not interested in it.

 

The real world does not begin until real games.

 

By agreement between the team owners and players they have made camp and a few OTAs mandatory, so even though they are not real things we can assess with the same accuracy as real games, those sessions are something I am interested in and demand attendance.

 

However, until the players show real problems in real games under this coaching staff I think that voluntary OTA attendance is nice but really soap opera stuff.

 

In the real world we have seen the most extraordinary of athletes such as Bruce Smith even malinger his way through preseason camp and still show up to play. While such activities are clearly unfair to both his teammates and fans because attendance is mandatory, it does show that the most extraordinary players can perform well even missing mandatory practices.

 

In this light I have little trouble with players (particularly the small number of starters involved) missing voluntary practices. This particularly true of WM who while not a premier player yet, has already shown in his brief career some great rushing production and is missing these voluntary sessions doing organized intense activity at the U rather than simply hacking off.

 

These are all big boys and if they fail to produce when the real games beging retribution should be swift, but until then these men get the benefit of the doubt that they will show up and play IMHO.

[Mikie2times]

If it has no real world effect I'm not interested in it. 

 

The real world does not begin until real games.

 

By agreement between the team owners and players they have made camp and a few OTAs mandatory, so even though they are not real things we can assess with the same accuracy as real games, those sessions are something I am interested in and demand attendance.

 

However, until the players show real problems in real games under this coaching staff I think that voluntary OTA attendance is nice but really soap opera stuff.

 

In the real world we have seen the most extraordinary of athletes such as Bruce Smith even malinger his way through preseason camp and still show up to play.  While such activities are clearly unfair to both his teammates and fans because attendance is mandatory, it does show that the most extraordinary players can perform well even missing mandatory practices.

 

In this light I have little trouble with players (particularly the small number of starters  involved) missing voluntary practices.  This particularly true of WM who while not a premier player yet, has already shown in his brief career some great rushing production and is missing these voluntary sessions doing organized intense activity at the U rather than simply hacking off.

 

These are all big boys and if they fail to produce when the real games beging retribution should be swift, but until then these men get the benefit of the doubt that they will show up and play IMHO.

703041[/snapback]

 

I think it matters but not to the soap opera proportion some posters make it out to be. The fact is we really don't know how much better Willis MaGahee could be, or even further the Buffalo Bills, if most our starters showed up to set an example. We see a player’s performance on the field and we compare it against the rest of the league. In Bruce Smith's case he was a dominant player, and one of the best of all time, so when he never showed up for these OTAs it didn't bother us. But what I wonder is what if Bruce Smith did attend these OTAs could he perhaps been even better? If he cared more about making the Bills the best TEAM possible would he become as dominant as Reggie White? I just feel like if we had more of those guys back in the early 90’s we might have a ring right now.

[Pyrite Gal]

I think it matters but not to the soap opera proportion some posters make it out to be. The fact is we really don't know how much better Willis MaGahee could be, or even further the Buffalo Bills, if most our starters showed up to set an example. We see a player’s performance on the field and we compare it against the rest of the league. In Bruce Smith's case he was a dominant player, and one of the best of all time, so when he never showed up for these OTAs it didn't bother us. But what I wonder is what if Bruce Smith did attend these OTAs could he perhaps been even better? If he cared more about making the Bills the best TEAM possible would he become as dominant as Reggie White? I just feel like if we had more of those guys back in the early 90’s we might have a ring right now.

703051[/snapback]

 

I brought up the Bruce example certainly because his example should be extended to any current Bill because he was such an athlete he simply did not need the same prep as others, but because it does indicate that such conventional wisdom of the necessity of camp OR OTAs is simply different for different players.

 

The Bruce example should also be considered as different in not only was he a better athlete than the norm, but his norm was not only to miss anything offseason or voluntary but to actually even try to avoid the mandatory. Folks should simply acknowledge that while it must take an extraoridinary player to skip mandatory work and play well, it may well be possible that a player who is "merely" starter quality does in dact need pre-season, attendance at these offseason gigs may well really be optional in terms of performance.

 

As far as the specific question of whether Bruce would have been that much better if he had worked harder in camp OR attended offseason voluntary work, my sense is:

 

1. If he had consitently shown a slow start or demonstrated a need to play himself into shape, then a case could be made he would have been well served by more serious early play.

 

On the contrary, he was known for his surprisingly fast starts many or most seasons.

 

2. If the team consistenly showed some since of being on different pages due to his missing practice time, a reasonable case can be made that his malingering hurt.

 

I know of case where this showing has been effectively or objectively made.

 

3. Switching to the WM case as this very young player is no Bruce and Jauron is no Marv in terms of Bills HC experience:

 

A. Even though Bills coaches have gone on record being disappointed with the vet turnout. Jauron has also said that it works well for the rookies and younger players to get reps they would not get if the starters were here. This advantage of vet non attendance should not be simply ignored.

 

B. In particular looking at missing vets like getting older Villarial and previously badly injured WM, I'm quite happy to see these players misses being put through any optional paces as I would prefer wear and tear on them happen later rather than in voluntary pracitice.

 

C, If anything for McGahee in particular, even with him being sat too much on 3rd down there certaintly have been games where his number was called over 30 times a game. Even with the seemingly odd sitting of him on critical downs, I still worry about us overusing him rather than underusing him. I'd run him more on 3rd down and be happy to see him sit all the OTAs out if this reduces his use overall as we use him more on 3rd down.

[LabattBlue]

How dare Thurman say that WM should be at the voluntary OTA's. Doesn't he side with the folks here who insist that it is no big deal and that it is his right not to attend.

 

 

"You know, those are those guys from the U," said Thomas, referring to players from the University of Miami. "They walk to a different beat. I wish he were at camp. He is basically the offense and they're putting in a new (system) and he should be a part of it."

[Robert Paulson]

Where i live fans in green bay and chicago our crying about the same thing.

 

this leads me to belive that this is happening all over the league and is not just a Bill's issue.

 

for the most part it is not a big deal. it gives the rookies more reps.

 

if there are a lot of no shows for the mandatory mini camps and training camp then that is another story.

 

but for now it is simply there is nothing else for the writers to write about so this makes the front page.

[Stussy109]

Honestly....If I were Willis, I don't think I'd show up either. Maybe the guy values his free time with friends and family. Can't blame the guy. It'd be in his best interest, and i would follow suit, show up for at least 1 to shine a little good light on yourself. i wouldn't be surprised if he shows at the next one.

[obie_wan]

I think it matters but not to the soap opera proportion some posters make it out to be. The fact is we really don't know how much better Willis MaGahee could be, or even further the Buffalo Bills, if most our starters showed up to set an example. We see a player’s performance on the field and we compare it against the rest of the league. In Bruce Smith's case he was a dominant player, and one of the best of all time, so when he never showed up for these OTAs it didn't bother us. But what I wonder is what if Bruce Smith did attend these OTAs could he perhaps been even better? If he cared more about making the Bills the best TEAM possible would he become as dominant as Reggie White? I just feel like if we had more of those guys back in the early 90’s we might have a ring right now.

703051[/snapback]

 

Bruce usually showed up - he just didn't practice due to an unlisted "injury".

 

Players should make the commitment to the team they play for, including living in that city year round- and attending all team functions, mandatory or not.

 

It's small price to pay for the millions they get to play a kid's game.

 

But if Drew could throw to the neighborhood kids in Montana and count it as serious preparation - why shouldn't Willis stay away?

[finknottle]

I don't consider the fact that these guys aren't at the OTA's a big deal at all.  The only player I was concerned with was Clements...and that wasn't showing up, it was just signing.  Once he signed, he could go and work out, talk to coaches, get the playbook, etc...

 

You don't have to be at an OTA to hear the new terminology and learn plays.  You can do that with a playbook.  And there is going to be plenty of time to adjust and get comfotable in mandatory camps.

 

And that "unspoken expectation" is far more from the team than the players.  The rookies "need" to be there.  Would it be better if all the Vets were there?  Sure, just not enough that it should be an issue.  Weren't there years with GW that everyone showed up?  Maybe even with MM, can't remember.  How well did that turn out?  100% participation is good for nothing but headlines.

702935[/snapback]

 

How would you feel if none of the veterans attended?

[BADOLBILZ]

I think it matters but not to the soap opera proportion some posters make it out to be. The fact is we really don't know how much better Willis MaGahee could be, or even further the Buffalo Bills, if most our starters showed up to set an example. We see a player’s performance on the field and we compare it against the rest of the league. In Bruce Smith's case he was a dominant player, and one of the best of all time, so when he never showed up for these OTAs it didn't bother us. But what I wonder is what if Bruce Smith did attend these OTAs could he perhaps been even better? If he cared more about making the Bills the best TEAM possible would he become as dominant as Reggie White? I just feel like if we had more of those guys back in the early 90’s we might have a ring right now.

703051[/snapback]

 

That's revisionist history. During the Bills run in the early 1990's, free agency was at first non-existent and then in it's infancy. OTA's are about getting everyone on the same page so that the limited amount of summer practice time can be put to good use, and back then, roster turnover was minimal and OTA's were essentially rookie camps. Hell, for that team, the preseason was a month too long. Dogging Bruce Smith is also ridiculous. He was famous for missed camps, but he also had knee or shoulder surgery every offseason in the 1990's. Reggie White was out of shape and inconsistent and benefited from a career spent in attacking 4-3 schemes opposite overmatched RT's like the forever immortalized Max Lane, while Bruce was consistently dominant and in world class condition while playing as a 265 lb. 3-4 DE and lining up against THE BEST tackles in the game. Even in the twilight of his career, he could still torment today's best, Orlando Pace and Walter Jones, like noone before or since. Great player, bad publicity, much of which was his own fault, but definately underappreciated compared to the overrated Reggie White.

 

Back to OTA's, it's a different ballgame today, and it's become an all too famialar scene for the Bills to come out the blocks slow and blaming it on not "executing". New coaches get extra OTA time specifically to help them catch up to teams that at least have a core of veterans versed in their schemes. Under the circumstances, the participation in OTA's this year has been a disgrace. Will it manifest itself on the field? I'd bet it does.