fitnbills Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 I believe the Bills issues began when they decided to start cutting last year vets. The issue is: 1. We made haste decisions...wayyy to quick to pull the trigger in cutting our vets from last year. We never took into consideration that with the salary cap increasing how it would impact our team. There was no reason to cut MW, SA, and LM when we did. We could have kept Mike Williams and ask him to restructure his contract. He wasn't a bad player just grossly over paid in terms of production. We never found a replacment for him. Sam Adams was another that was cut premature. He was a force a large body that could move and penetrate the pocket. We attempted to replace him but Tripplett isn't a nose tackle. Lawyer Milloy was in my opinion the last one to be cut that was premature. He may not be what he once was; however he was serviceable and very depedable in addition to being great leader. 2. Because we made Haste decisions we tried drafting replacements for these cuts that weren't necessary. Our 1st round pick DW is a direct effect of the LM cut. Our 2nd 1st round pick Mccargo was a direct effect of SA cut. 3. I just believe the early cuts in which we didn't have to make caused us to panic and reach in the draft. 4. We never replaced MW, if we still had him our OL would look a lot more serviceable this upcoming season. These are just my thoughts tell me what you think?
BEAST MODE BABY! Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 I think you're making the mistake of falling in love with names instead of looking at performance. LM was not the same player he was a few years ago and slowed noticeably. And all the guys we've cut, including Pat Williams, wouldn't have fit a cover 2. MW was a bust. Happens to all teams. Look at the Saints, who just traded the 6th overall selection to the Pats.
stuckincincy Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 These are just my thoughts tell me what you think? 703921[/snapback] I suspect Adams and MW would have just gone through the motions...
fitnbills Posted June 6, 2006 Author Posted June 6, 2006 I think you're making the mistake of falling in love with names instead of looking at performance. LM was not the same player he was a few years ago and slowed noticeably. And all the guys we've cut, including Pat Williams, wouldn't have fit a cover 2. MW was a bust. Happens to all teams. Look at the Saints, who just traded the 6th overall selection to the Pats. 703934[/snapback] That's true that LM lost a step but do you think it warrants a 1st round pick? We still could have had him and used our 1st for another position of need. Also, we keep talking about players fitting a system you have to build a system around the players in my opinion. Certain players have different strengths and if you just continue to right off players saying they don't fit a scheme what happen when your DC gets fired? I may be wrong but wasn't SA cut prior to Fewell being chosen as our DC?
fitnbills Posted June 6, 2006 Author Posted June 6, 2006 My question is what did we spend all of our increased salary cap money on? I'm not sure how much the salary cap increased but it was a lot. We signed no big money free agents... We lost 4 big money players. So the point I was trying to push is had we kept those players and added additonal free agents and draft picks to them we may be looking a lot more better than we do at this time.
dave mcbride Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 That's true that LM lost a step but do you think it warrants a 1st round pick? We still could have had him and used our 1st for another position of need. Also, we keep talking about players fitting a system you have to build a system around the players in my opinion. Certain players have different strengths and if you just continue to right off players saying they don't fit a scheme what happen when your DC gets fired? I may be wrong but wasn't SA cut prior to Fewell being chosen as our DC? 703940[/snapback] adams was horrible - just horrible - last year.
Rico Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 That's true that LM lost a step but do you think it warrants a 1st round pick? We still could have had him and used our 1st for another position of need. 703940[/snapback] Or we could've cut LM, used our 1st for another position of need, and sufferred for a year with a lesser SS not named Coy Wire.
port allegany Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 My question is what did we spend all of our increased salary cap money on? I'm not sure how much the salary cap increased but it was a lot. We signed no big money free agents... We lost 4 big money players. So the point I was trying to push is had we kept those players and added additonal free agents and draft picks to them we may be looking a lot more better than we do at this time. 703946[/snapback] I think you answered your own question. You made some excellent points and I was leaning towards your thinking until I thought of a longer term than 'this year'. Cutting those guys will not only allow younger guys to play but it also frees up $$$ for the next few years or help sign up a few younger starters now. The only one I would have tried to keep would be Mike Williams due to his age - if he came into our camp at 340 as he says he will for Jax then we would potentially have our bookends (Peters and Williams). However, I also realize he didn't perform here nor give much reason to believe he would in the future. It's just I hated giving up on that potential if someone (anyone) could reach him or if he just matures. Oh well, he's gone - water under the bridge so all in all I'm OK with the cuts and looking forward.
Bill from NYC Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 We could have kept Mike Williams and ask him to restructure his contract. He wasn't a bad player just grossly over paid in terms of production. We never found a replacment for him. We never replaced MW, if we still had him our OL would look a lot more serviceable this upcoming season. These are just my thoughts tell me what you think? 703921[/snapback] Let me address these points one at a time, OK? 1) Mike Williams sucked. There was no reason to keep him and let him continue to "eat" yet more cap space. A restructure would have only postponed the inevitable. Cutting him help us big time in 07 in terms of cap space. 2) Peters is already a better pass blocker than Williams. He is young and will probably improve vs. the run. Pass blocking is generally considered harder than run blocking. In any event, dumping Fat Mike was a smart move under any circumstances. Good riddance to this cap drain.
apuszczalowski Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 There is only one offseason move that was not necessary but became necessary due to the salary and the player wanting out, and that was moulds. Every other cut was necessary either due to age, salary or attitude, and in some cases, some of each. Adams had a poor attitude, and was too old. Milloy was too old and getting too slow, and Mike Williams was no where near worth what he was getting payed (and there is a limit as to how much you can renegotiate a salary and it still would have been too much) Face it, these players are gone, they didn't fit our needs anymore, Marv wants a young, hungrey team of players wanting to play, not guys who want to play when they want. You can cry all you want that you can no longer wear your Milloy, Williams, Adams, or Moulds jersey anymore, but it was time for a change, and Marv has done just that
34-78-83 Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 There is only one offseason move that was not necessary but became necessary due to the salary and the player wanting out, and that was moulds. Every other cut was necessary either due to age, salary or attitude, and in some cases, some of each. Adams had a poor attitude, and was too old. Milloy was too old and getting too slow, and Mike Williams was no where near worth what he was getting payed (and there is a limit as to how much you can renegotiate a salary and it still would have been too much) Face it, these players are gone, they didn't fit our needs anymore, Marv wants a young, hungrey team of players wanting to play, not guys who want to play when they want. You can cry all you want that you can no longer wear your Milloy, Williams, Adams, or Moulds jersey anymore, but it was time for a change, and Marv has done just that 703962[/snapback] Good realistic post.
BUFFALOTONE Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 I believe the Bills issues began when they decided to start cutting last year vets. The issue is: 1. We made haste decisions...wayyy to quick to pull the trigger in cutting our vets from last year. We never took into consideration that with the salary cap increasing how it would impact our team. There was no reason to cut MW, SA, and LM when we did. We could have kept Mike Williams and ask him to restructure his contract. He wasn't a bad player just grossly over paid in terms of production. We never found a replacment for him. Sam Adams was another that was cut premature. He was a force a large body that could move and penetrate the pocket. We attempted to replace him but Tripplett isn't a nose tackle. Lawyer Milloy was in my opinion the last one to be cut that was premature. He may not be what he once was; however he was serviceable and very depedable in addition to being great leader. 2. Because we made Haste decisions we tried drafting replacements for these cuts that weren't necessary. Our 1st round pick DW is a direct effect of the LM cut. Our 2nd 1st round pick Mccargo was a direct effect of SA cut. 3. I just believe the early cuts in which we didn't have to make caused us to panic and reach in the draft. 4. We never replaced MW, if we still had him our OL would look a lot more serviceable this upcoming season. These are just my thoughts tell me what you think? 703921[/snapback] I couldnt disagree more with you, nothing personal, but these were not haste decisions these guys new they were expendable by their performance on the field. Milloy couldnt cover, we couldnt disguise a blitz at all last year. He made our defense way to predictable. MW is a just a bust no other way to put it. Adams showed how good he was without Pat Williams by his side, and it wasnt very. These guys all came with a price and it was way too high to keep old used up talent. As for the draft I think we did a good job of addressing a big hole in our secondary. This will be the strongest part of our defense for years to come. Hopefully the the aquisitions we made in FA our Oline will get a step better. But this team will not be as bad as last years. These guys are taking this team in the right direction and I am happy to see it.
finknottle Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 MW was a bust. Happens to all teams. Look at the Saints, who just traded the 6th overall selection to the Pats. 703934[/snapback] But - but - but - he's our first rounder! He has more upside than the new guy, he just needs more time!
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 Haste? Why would anyone think the Bills cut these guys in haste? Was there some deadline that we don't know about, seeing as how the Bills would STILL be under the cap for the old CBA for this year? No, the moves were calculated. And the Bills had been losing WITH these guys, so it's not like they were THE reason the Bills were doing so well.
mary owen Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 I believe the Bills issues began when they decided to start cutting last year vets. The issue is: 1. We made haste decisions...wayyy to quick to pull the trigger in cutting our vets from last year. We never took into consideration that with the salary cap increasing how it would impact our team. There was no reason to cut MW, SA, and LM when we did. We could have kept Mike Williams and ask him to restructure his contract. He wasn't a bad player just grossly over paid in terms of production. We never found a replacment for him. Sam Adams was another that was cut premature. He was a force a large body that could move and penetrate the pocket. We attempted to replace him but Tripplett isn't a nose tackle. Lawyer Milloy was in my opinion the last one to be cut that was premature. He may not be what he once was; however he was serviceable and very depedable in addition to being great leader. 2. Because we made Haste decisions we tried drafting replacements for these cuts that weren't necessary. Our 1st round pick DW is a direct effect of the LM cut. Our 2nd 1st round pick Mccargo was a direct effect of SA cut. 3. I just believe the early cuts in which we didn't have to make caused us to panic and reach in the draft. 4. We never replaced MW, if we still had him our OL would look a lot more serviceable this upcoming season. These are just my thoughts tell me what you think? 703921[/snapback] The subject of your post itself is premature. Who said the Bills have "problems"? Have they played one game yet? One preseason game? one camp? The problems can be traced directly back to last season....5-11. That's the problem and the solution (in Marv's/Dick's eyes) is being put into the works now. I love how everyone assumes this team is doomed when the season hasn't even started yet! and people agree with this???!!! let's say we win 5 games again this year. But our Defense and Offense rank higher than last year (which shouldn't be too hard to accomplish)...without the big picture being completed yet, that in itself could be looked upon as a success, or at least an upswing. We could have kept Mike Williams and ask him to restructure his contract. He wasn't a bad player just grossly over paid in terms of production. We never found a replacment for him .....I remember reading somewhere that they already proposed that to him and his agent said "no-way". These were early reports, but it was being considered. But when you look at the whole MW saga, what's usually overlooked in lieu of questionable to semi-adequate performance is the fact that this guy did NOT like pro football. Had no heart...doesn't anyone remember his little psychological problem prior to last year? It wasn't all due to family problems. I'm with the organization on that move....good riddance big Mike, there's no room for a player like you on a rebuilding team....not at any price, really. SA and LM cuts....they were most certainly becoming liabilities on the filed. Why would the Bills cut them??? We never took into consideration that with the salary cap increasing how it would impact our team. are you kidding? as much as Ralph and his advisors were knee deep in the new CBA negotiations, it's impossible to believe that they were clueless about the new salary cap and the ramifications of the new agreement. I just don't buy that.
a player to be named later Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 Maybe Jim Kelly should have taken the stuff they give to Ralph. He coulda played 5 more years.
John from Riverside Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 Fit....I am out the door now and I hope to be able to post on this when I get back..... No offense....but I dont think I agreed with anything in that post......take a while ot explain though....
obie_wan Posted June 6, 2006 Posted June 6, 2006 That's true that LM lost a step but do you think it warrants a 1st round pick? We still could have had him and used our 1st for another position of need. Also, we keep talking about players fitting a system you have to build a system around the players in my opinion. Certain players have different strengths and if you just continue to right off players saying they don't fit a scheme what happen when your DC gets fired? I may be wrong but wasn't SA cut prior to Fewell being chosen as our DC? 703940[/snapback] I am interested in what system you would implement to take advantage of fat, slow, old often-injured malcontents with bloated contracts that were cut loose?
Recommended Posts