Bills Problems began prior to the draft

[fitnbills]

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.

703952[/snapback]

 

 

Or we could have drafted another safety. Bullocks is a nice SS that we could have got in the 2nd round or started Mat Bowens.

[mary owen]

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]

 

 

Big money, big money, big money....

 

My question is what did we spend all of our increased salary cap money on?

 

how about more than one "big money" FA.

 

since when does bloated salaries translate to winners? did you want the Bills to spend a ton on ONE player who, because he gets paid a huge chunk of cash, is going to win ball games all by himself? You need to spend wisely. I think had this team moved up in the draft for "big money" Ferguson, or gone out and gotten Bently or Hutchinson, to me, that is being hasty. Those are haste decisions....you can't fix it over night by writing fat cheks.

 

I'm not picking on you FIT, just that these are the cries of a lot out there who want big name players with huge price tags....why?

[fitnbills]

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.

703959[/snapback]

 

 

I also share your sentiments in regards to MW. I also don't have a problem with them choosing to go younger but ONLY if your personel supports that. I REALLY don't believe we've improved as a team from last year. And I believe that's the intent every year.

[fitnbills]

I believe the injury to TKO and the loss of PW were missed greatly last year.

 

So this is my thought: We draft another DT to fill the gap left by Pat Williams. Ngata or Bunkley. We then address our OL in the second & third. After that we address our secondary. Get a LB for some depth in the later rounds.

 

I know you guys may not like this comment but I also don't believe DJ was the best coach selection as well!

 

From everything I read on him he seems really nice and the palyers past and present seem to like him. But how often does player coaches win in this league? I believe the coach starts the engine moving. And our coach selections have also hurt or W/L record. MM and his staff were major contributors to a number of our losses so it wasn't just b/c of a lack of talent we lost.

 

Perhaps with a new coach and additional draft picks and free agents we may perhaps be in the playoff hunt had we just added to last years team instead.

[fitnbills]

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?

 

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.

 

SA and LM cuts....they were most certainly becoming liabilities on the filed. Why would the Bills cut them???

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.

704027[/snapback]

 

 

You are correct there hasn't been a game played yet; therefore no one knows anything for sure. However, leaving out the fact that you're a die hard fan of the Bills... Are you going to say that you feel confident that with the moves that were made from the front office down the Bills appear to be a contender?

 

 

The second comment you made was in reference to "if we win 5 games again and statistically we've improved our rank offensively and defensively that's considered a success or at least an upswing."

 

Well since when do we count rankings over W/L? In the end W/L is all that matters. So what if you have the #1 ranked offense if you won only 3 games. Cut it out... it doesn't mean anything if you can't win.

 

 

 

 

And as for Ralph understanding the ramifications you are correct in some regards. I was speaking in reference to salary cap space numbers not overall revenue and expense. Perhaps you're right and it was calculated and they chose to go with cheaper talent.

[Rico]

Well since when do we count rankings over W/L? In the end W/L is all that matters. So what if you have the #1 ranked offense if you won only 3 games. Cut it out... it doesn't mean anything if you can't win.

704057[/snapback]

Excellent point... save the useless stats for baseball. Just win, baby.

[Pyrite Gal]

Or we could have drafted another safety. Bullocks is a nice SS that we could have got in the 2nd round or started Mat Bowens.

704039[/snapback]

 

Bowen looks like a very good pick-up for his ST play and I am psyched that Marv views ST as a third of the game rather than as an afterthought, however, there is little demonstration from Bowen in his career that he is much more than a back-up as a field player, and I think we would get continually picked on at SS if he were the starter.

 

My sense is he would likely beat out Coy Wire to start at SS, but given that this is even a question and it is pretty clear that Wire is inadequate at SS to start, speaks to how problematic it likely would be to rely on Bowen.

 

Bullock is a nice player, but certainly there is a clear consensus among the undits and also as seen in the market of when players were taken that Huff/Whitner are a cut above the other safeties and are by far the most likely ones to start immediately for their teams.

 

Bullocak does not strike me as a reasonable choice to start for Milloy or immediately at SS as I even have my doubts about the third SS taken in the first round by Miami being able to start immediately.

 

Bullock presents the additional problem that in fact for the Bills to have taken him with their 10th choice in round 2, since Bullock went at #8 in round 2 we would have had to hae traded up to get him.

 

In general, I think you are absolutely correct in realizing that the Bills forced themselves into having the SS need that forced them to take Whitner at #8 and to trade up to get McCargo.

 

However, I disagree that there seemed to be much haste in making this decision as both the cut of Milloy and Adams did not happen immediately after the season ended, after Lvy or Jauron were hired, and was not forced by the cap as even if no new CBA agreement had been reached we were in far better cap shape than most and not forced to make cuts beyond those we chose to make.

 

One can disagree with the judgments they made, but there seems to be little objective evidence that these judgments were made in haste.

 

As far as it goes, the judgment to cut these players was generally reasonable based on what we can know and probably is quite reasonable based on what you and I cannot know.

 

1. Milloy was a good cut- This is a good player, but he is well into the backside of his career. This can be seen in the games he has missed due to injuries he likely would have played through when he was a younger man. It also seemed pretty clear that part of the Bills reduced effectiveness stopping the run last year was due to the reduced effectiveness of Milloy who had a nagging arm injury last year.

 

His deficits were even going to get greater exposure with our switch to a Cover 2 rather than the zone blitz as our base D approach. The zone blitz emphasized the strongest part of the Milloy game which is run stopping as he lined up essentially like another LB.

 

However, the centerfield duty of a safety in the Cover 2 is more Vincent's game than Milloy. It made perfect football sense to cut him.

 

2. Adams was also probably a good cut- I think his player skills actually fit the Cover 2 well as his explosive first step would allow him to penetrate like we want and his big body can play the sam,e role Big Ted played in Chicago's Cover 2.

 

But I also so think SA was a very difficult player to coach. One of the great ironies is that the Bills got more consistent effort out of SA than most others (he only took a quarter of the plays off for compared to as much as half a game in his hayday where he was such a sackmaster folks tolerated this cause he was so good when he tried and actually opposing OL players never knew when he was going on vacation in mid-game so they could never take the rests on any play SA could).

 

Yet this improvement created a monster as he wou;d go into a mid-game tirade as we benched him on 3rd down in favor of Edwards who was not good enough to start and play a whole game, but when he knew he could blow the was on a dozen or less plays a game as a back-up rotating him with SA.

 

Particularly given that SA was well into the backside of his career (I am plesantly surprised he has survived this long) and my sense he was playing for his opwn glory (sack stats) rather than for the good of the team (stay at home and stop the run, he may well have been a disruptive force on the team that mandatred a trade and you and I would never know this by simply watching games or video tape.

 

All these cyts were either good or could habve been based on what we know.

[mary owen]

Well since when do we count rankings over W/L? In the end W/L is all that matters. So what if you have the #1 ranked offense if you won only 3 games. Cut it out... it doesn't mean anything if you can't win.

 

dude, I am not saying that at all, so please don't twist my words. I am merely pointing out that this may happen and still that's better than what most of you have already determined....that we are 3-13 at best and that picking up the highest priced FA O-lineman and/or the highest "ranked" ROOKIE DT, that BOOM, we are all of a sudden contenders? in one year? with a new GM, HC, DC, OC, O- and D-systems???? gimme a break....you tell me how keeping SA, LM, EM, and drafting Bunkley and Winston Justice (examples) are going to AUTOMATICALLY take us from 5-11 to the playoffs??? take a look at what our D and O ranked last year....you can't win when you are in the cellar of both those rankings...you just can't. so it's not just about numbers.

 

Are you going to say that you feel confident that with the moves that were made from the front office down the Bills appear to be a contender?

 

No one is saying that what the Bills did are making us a playoff contender over night. I certainly wouldn't expect the same team that went 5-11 to dramatically improve with a few additions. Not like we were just a few elements away from being great.

So to answer your question, no. never said that at all. However, I feel real good about what they did to improve the team.....YES, from the front office down.

even if it is just a step in the right direction in return for greater things later.

 

also, I'd rather win frugally than to lose expensively.

[JimBob2232]

But....at least we have 15 mil to spend on June Cuts!

[Albany,n.y.]

I also share your sentiments in regards to MW. I also don't have a problem with them choosing to go younger but ONLY if your personel supports that. I REALLY don't believe we've improved as a team from last year. And I believe that's the intent every year.

704044[/snapback]

Not necessarily. Marv may have come in thinking he had 2 options 1) Sign some players keep some older vets and possibly improve to between 6-10 & 9-7, then finish around 500 for most of the immediate future like the Jets did for years. or 2) Dump most of the high priced vets on the wrong side of 30, get a bunch of very young draft choices (the 1st day it was all underclassmen), find out if you need to get a QB or if you can find 1 for the next 5-10 years between Losman & Nall. Have a roster set for multi year run at SB contention like the Bills of the 90s within 3 years and not give a damn about the W-L record in 2006.

 

I believe Marv chose option #2.

[Mark VI]

We were 5-11 WITH these people and haven't played a game in 2006 yet. All speculation with camp and pre-season to give us our first real glance at the new regime and system they brought in.

 

I was a bit surprised to see Fat Sam go but he raised some flags last season. Milloy didn't fit this current D at all, since he was an in the box Safety ( 4th LB ) with zero coverage ability. Mike Williams was a complete puss and wouldn't play hurt.

[/dev/null]

Honestly, they began when Wade Phillips got fired.

703932[/snapback]

 

i think it goes back further than to February 13, 1998

[X. Benedict]

I was glad to see all three go.

Milloy - class guy - but not what Buffalo needs.

[JAMIEBUF12]

no way i am glad we cut these guys i was sorry to see pat williams go but that was a year earlier. lawyer milloy is done sam adams has some gas left in the tank if he is used properly and he is motovated.go bills in"06

[mary owen]

We were 5-11 WITH these people and haven't played a game in 2006 yet. All speculation with camp and pre-season to give us our first real glance at the new regime and system they brought in.

 

  I was a bit surprised to see Fat Sam go but he raised some flags last season. Milloy didn't fit this current D at all, since he was an in the box Safety ( 4th LB ) with zero coverage ability. Mike Williams was a complete puss and wouldn't play hurt.

704114[/snapback]

 

Big Mike was a huge puss, you are right. He acted like a big baby.

 

Another excuse I keep hearing was that we lost TKO. But we were getting run all over by Tampa and Atlanta before he went down. We looked weaker on D after the opener, and btw, all Defenses looked good against Houston last year, so game one didn't tell us much. But games 2 and 3 were very indicative of the way the season was going to go for our D. talk about red flags.

 

we had problems, folks. so I really don't see how people can say the cuts we made were damaging. NO ONE KNOWS YET.

 

also, this is the way it's been since FA began. No team was able to hold onto guys like PW, SA, LM, EM.....the Bills are no different than the other 31.

[Orton's Arm]

Not necessarily.  Marv may have come in thinking he had 2 options 1) Sign some players keep some older vets and possibly improve to between 6-10 & 9-7, then finish around 500 for most of the immediate future like the Jets did for years. or 2) Dump most of the high priced vets on the wrong side of 30, get a bunch of very young draft choices (the 1st day it was all underclassmen), find out if you need to get a QB or if you can find 1 for the next 5-10 years between Losman & Nall.  Have a roster set for multi year run at SB contention like the Bills of the 90s within 3 years and not give a damn about the W-L record in 2006.

 

I believe Marv chose option #2.

704102[/snapback]

Excellent post. The older players Marv cut couldn't help us in 2007 or 2008 anyway, so we may as well get rid of them now. If that means losing an extra game or two in 2006 (thereby improving the team's draft position) then so be it. The younger players are getting experience, and the front office gets to see which of the younger guys can play, and which can't.

 

Sometimes veteran players set the tone for the team. In internal discussions, the Patriots described Lawyer Milloy as a "selfish leader." Sam Adams had motivation problems, and showed some signs of being a cancer. Moulds had clearly had it with the Bills. You don't want guys like that rubbing off on your younger players.

[fitnbills]

Excellent post.  The older players Marv cut couldn't help us in 2007 or 2008 anyway, so we may as well get rid of them now.  If that means losing an extra game or two in 2006 (thereby improving the team's draft position) then so be it.  The younger players are getting experience, and the front office gets to see which of the younger guys can play, and which can't. 

 

Sometimes veteran players set the tone for the team.  In internal discussions, the Patriots described Lawyer Milloy as a "selfish leader."  Sam Adams had motivation problems, and showed some signs of being a cancer.  Moulds had clearly had it with the Bills.  You don't want guys like that rubbing off on your younger players.

704260[/snapback]

 

 

I can understand it from this perspective.

[stinky finger]

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....

704030[/snapback]

Hey....no problem....take your time.....we'll wait....could you just bring us all back a coffee?

[Nanker]

Bills Problems began prior to the draft, by cutting MW, LM, and Sam Adams

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 don't know the "Problems" of which you speak.

Mike Williams was replaced by a better player.

Lawyer Milloy was replaced by our first round draft pick

Sam Adams was replaced by our second first round draft pick

 

Maybe you can make a statement like this about TD's last year and the cuts HE made causing problems. Because THERE WERE PROBLEMS last year. Cutting Pat Williams and Jonah The Whale Jennings and (Gawd I can hardly believe I'm saying this...) cutting Droo Bledsoe were less than brilliant moves. (ok, argue here cut/not re-signing/yada-yada-yada).

 

At least Marv has put some warm bodies into the holes he made and didn't leave gaping maws there like Donnaho did.

 

If all you want to do is root for star veterans with "names" I would recommend watching a lot of Steve Sabol's NFL Films. They pretty much only show famous players and great games. That's kind of the Dan Snieder approach to building a football team - buy the over the hill big name vet players and watch them fall on their asses.

 

Myself, I'd rather live in the present and frankly I look forward to seeing new players every year even if they're "no-names."

[Mickey]

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 think I heard recently that Fletcher said LM was unable to cover anymore and so they constantly had him up in the box in run support. You can't have a guy like that on the field at any price. MW was beaten out of a position fair and square by a better player, ie, Jason Peters. On top of that, he showed himself unable to play guard. We gave him a shot and got Holcomb knocked out of the game as a result. Even re-structured, he would have been a waste of cap and roster space.

 

Even Adams himself knew he was a goner.

 

I think this draft will turn out to have been a solid one. It just doesn't please people who like to see head line grabbing picks and trades coming out of the front office such as trading for Bledsoe, picking McGahee or trading up for JP. SS and DT are not exactly glamorous positions to address. It is what we needed though.

 

We are playing a defense that relies heavily on good DT's and an active SS to be effective and going into the draft we had Coy Wire at SS along with Tim Anderson and aging vet Tripplet at DT backed up by essentially nobody. In the draft we got the best SS, or second best if you count that other guy as a FS, on the board at the time we took him. We got the best DT left on the board when we took him who was also the last decent prospect available at that position (the next one was taken in the third or fourth round).

 

I know, we didn't show how clever we are with trade downs or score high on the abstract "value board" that Mel Kiper and other draft gurus use to evaluate the wisdom of this or that pick.

 

Donahoe's drafts consistently were graded very highly by these same experts. That worked out well didn't it?

 

When was the last time you found yourself saying to a buddy in the car while waiting in stadium traffic after a game "boy, Lawyer Milloy had a helluva game, didn't he?" or, "Williams was an animal out there today" or "Big Sam dominated the game today"?

 

It is a little early to be declaring this draft to have been an abject failure. We needed a SS, we got a good one. We got a guy from freaking Ohio State, a virtual DB factory, who ran a 4.45 at the combine. We needed a DT who can get in the backfield, we got one, a 300lb tackle who runs a 5.1 40 who consistently makes plays in the backfield. Both are juniors who haven't even shown their best yet. Why are so many convinced that this draft was such a freaking Waterloo?