Anyone just see Moulds catch and dive

[dave mcbride]

Why don't you add the game before when his "motivation" caused him to miss it and the Bills to lose it. Then suddenly his four game figures are 6.6 or so catches a game for 76 yards a game. Or the game before that when his "motivation" caused us to lose the game. So it goes down to about 5.5 catches a game for 61 yards.

 

Moulds was "motivated" to save face. Period.

705118[/snapback]

??

 

where is this coming from? moulds has played hard ever since he became a starter in 98, and no one has ever claimed that he dogged it.

 

besides, while i think you have no evidence to back your authoritative claim about the source of his motivation, at least you're admitting that he was motivated. whatever motivates the guy will do -- there are enough guys in the league (and on the bills) who don't have enough motivation. i'll take a motivated guy where i can find one.

 

anyway, this is all pretty irrelevant (indeed, this thread is a product of a misidentification). he's still a good player and not that old. he also played extremely well late last season and in all the games that holcomb started, and came on strong at the end. i expect to do well with the texans, and wish him the best.

[Dawgg]

Pardon me being rude, but you simply don't know what you are talking about in this case.

 

Why don't you add the game before when his "motivation" caused him to miss it and the Bills to lose it. Then suddenly his four game figures are 6.6 or so catches a game for 76 yards a game. Or the game before that when his "motivation" caused us to lose the game. So it goes down to about 5.5 catches a game for 61 yards.

 

Moulds was "motivated" to save face. Period.

705118[/snapback]

[Dawgg]

Exactly.

 

But don't let that confuse those who will do whatever it takes to bash one of our more productive players last year.

 

These same people laud the Bills for signing a worthless schmuck like Peerless Price at 4 years and $10 million. The Patriots offered him the vet minimum... which value system do you trust more: The Patriots or the Bills?

 

Case closed.

 

I'm not losing sleep over him being gone this year but at the same time, the guy can flat out play.  He has made some of the most difficult catches I have ever seen by a Bills WR with all due respect to Marlin Briscoe, Frank Lewis, Jerry Butler, Andre and Bobby Chandler.  He has huge hands which enabled him to make those one hand grabs.  I think the fall off in most of his numbers are more the product of a crappy offense, with crappy plays, crappy quarterbacks and a really, really crappy offensive line.  He has had a great career and did it with the likes of RJ, Todd Collins, Kelly Holcomb, an aging Bledsoe and Flutie at QB.  His glory days are gone, I agree, but I think he still has some game left in him.  Not enough to justify the salary we would have had to pay to keep him maybe but still, I wouldn't bet against him having a decent year.

705110[/snapback]

[KnightRider]

You can quote numbers all day long but I personally see those numbers reflecting more  on the passing game as a whole (QB play, OL and a viable running game to bring the safeties up to the line) than I do on Moulds decline.  Sure he's lost a step but he's still a fantastic possession WR (which the Bills sorely lack atm).

 

Oh, and you want stats?  Just check out the last three games to see what a motivated Moulds (and a QB that won't throw it more than 10 yards to other WRs) can bring to the table:

 

27 rec. for 305 yards

704801[/snapback]

 

At what point in his career did he have a better OL, running game, and a good QB, capable of thowing the ball more than 10 yards, than right now?

 

This team is into its 6 rebuilding year, and the offensive side wasn't very good before that...

[Kelly the Dog]

Pardon me being rude, but you simply don't know what you are talking about in this case.

705198[/snapback]

The facts are, which since Mort reported them NO ONE to my knowledge has refuted. Were that Moulds took himself out of the Miami game because he was pissed at the gameplan/play-calling. (Of course, we were up 21-0 at the time) Tyke Tolbert told him to go back in. Moulds refused. During halftime he said he doesn't have to listen to his coaches and played music by his stall instead, and didn't attend the coaches meetings. For this he was suspended for one game.

 

I have said this before and I don't know why it needs to be repeated but the NFLPA DOES NOT ALLOW A PLAYER TO BE SUSPENDED WITHOUT PAY FOR NO REASON. Never ever ever. They appeal the suspension and fines on virtually every case even when the guy is clearly guilty and they didn't do it at all with this. Clearly, irrefutably, Moulds did something terrible. He never disputed Mort's claim. The Bills trainer refuted Moulds's personal advisor's claim.

 

Mularkey, to his credit, stuck up for Moulds by not abusing him in the press even though Mularkey was taking some heat. It's one of few things Mularkey did right last year.

 

Moulds "motivation" was the factor. As in, he didn't have any because he became a pisspot.

 

Personally, I think he was just frustrated and he let it get the best of him. But did he make an inexcusable error? Did he work his ass off for the team for a lot of years before this? Hell, yes. Does that excuse his behavior this time? Hell, no. Guys are not always good or bad. Moulds was a good to great player and teammate and guy for a lot of years. He was a punk and a lousy player and teammate for a couple games. They both exist simultaneously.

[Dawgg]

Mort's facts are wrong and any reporting he does related to the Bills is slanted heavilly in favor of Donahoe -- and you know how that works.

 

The fact of the matter (and I did have some info from someone ON the team) was that the Moulds incident was the culmination of a series of events and he just lost his cool during the Miami game. He was being used as a decoy, which is fine with him if the team is winning -- but with the team losing, he was getting frustrated. In 2002, Moulds VOLUNTEERED to play decoy to open things up for Peerless and specifically told coaches to look the other way. At the time, the team was winning. It was quite the contrary under Mularkey's inept offense with poor blocking, gimmick plays and subpar QB play.

 

Both during and after the suspension, Moulds never took his concerns to the public. He accepted it like man and came back and played hard the rest of the way. Sure he made a mistake and he knows that -- but he had every right to be frustrated because he was not used properly in that offense.

 

 

The facts are, which since Mort reported them NO ONE to my knowledge has refuted. Were that Moulds took himself out of the Miami game because he was pissed at the gameplan/play-calling. (Of course, we were up 21-0 at the time) Tyke Tolbert told him to go back in. Moulds refused. During halftime he said he doesn't have to listen to his coaches and played music by his stall instead, and didn't attend the coaches meetings. For this he was suspended for one game.

 

I have said this before and I don't know why it needs to be repeated but the NFLPA DOES NOT ALLOW A PLAYER TO BE SUSPENDED WITHOUT PAY FOR NO REASON. Never ever ever. They appeal the suspension and fines on virtually every case even when the guy is clearly guilty and they didn't do it at all with this. Clearly, irrefutably, Moulds did something terrible. He never disputed Mort's claim. The Bills trainer refuted Moulds's personal advisor's claim.

 

Mularkey, to his credit, stuck up for Moulds by not abusing him in the press even though Mularkey was taking some heat. It's one of few things Mularkey did right last year.

 

Moulds "motivation" was the factor. As in, he didn't have any because he became a pisspot.

 

Personally, I think he was just frustrated and he let it get the best of him. But did he make an inexcusable error? Did he work his ass off for the team for a lot of years before this? Hell, yes. Does that excuse his behavior this time? Hell, no. Guys are not always good or bad. Moulds was a good to great player and teammate and guy for a lot of years. He was a punk and a lousy player and teammate for a couple games. They both exist simultaneously.

705210[/snapback]

[Kelly the Dog]

Mort's facts are wrong and any reporting he does related to the Bills is slanted heavilly in favor of Donahoe -- and you know how that works.

 

The fact of the matter (and I did have some info from someone ON the team) was that the Moulds incident was the culmination of a series of events and he just lost his cool during the Miami game.  He was being used as a decoy, which is fine with him if the team is winning -- but with the team losing, he was getting frustrated.  In 2002, Moulds VOLUNTEERED to play decoy to open things up for Peerless and specifically told coaches to look the other way.  At the time, the team was winning.  It was quite the contrary under Mularkey's inept offense with poor blocking, gimmick plays and subpar QB play.

 

Both during and after the suspension, Moulds never took his concerns to the public.  He accepted it like man and came back and played hard the rest of the way.  Sure he made a mistake and he knows that -- but he had every right to be frustrated because he was not used properly in that offense.

705255[/snapback]

So in other words, you're not refuting ANY of Mort's accusations or Moulds actions? Other than to say "Oh, they're wrong" but there is no other explanation. I agree and said in my post it was a result of him being frustrated. I believe it to be built up over 9 years and not 9 games. But that still doesn't in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER excuse what he did. Not one bit.

 

And it doesn't appear ironic to you that the time this frustration finally boiled over was when we were up 21-0 and Evans had three TDs?

 

And btw, I like Moulds, Still do. One of my favorite Bills. I don't think what he did negated the years and years of great play and attitude that he had. He had a right to be totally frustrated. He did NOT have a right to do what he did.

 

And frankly, this is simply my opinion. He pulled a Cris Carter and let Mularkey take a lot of the blame when Mularkey was the guy not saying anything to the press and getting crucified himself. Mularkey didn't do anything wrong here (except run a crappy offense), Moulds did. And yet Moulds, by his silence, let Mularkey take a load of crap.

[C.Biscuit97]

Exactly.

 

But don't let that confuse those who will do whatever it takes to bash one of our more productive players last year.

 

These same people laud the Bills for signing a worthless schmuck like Peerless Price at 4 years and $10 million.  The Patriots offered him the vet minimum... which value system do you trust more:  The Patriots or the Bills?

 

Case closed.

705205[/snapback]

 

To call PP a worthless schmuck is a little harsh don't you think? Yes, the guy has fallen off quite a bit from his days in Buffalo. However, WR is the position that depends on so many other variables. You need the line to hold their blocks and the QB to make his right reads and deliver the ball. I remember a few years ago, Vick was sacked more than Bledsoe. How in the world does that happen? Well, maybe their line wasn't that great. Or perhaps, Vick took too long making his reads. Additionally, Vick would look to run before routes had a chance to develop (PP is a strong route runner). Plus, Vick is not the most accurate passer to begin with. Point is that there is more to a wr's production falling off than just them being a "worthless schmuck." As another poster point out, guys like Galloway and Glenn are similar speed wrs who had a couple of down years and rebound last year in a big way in the right system.

 

As for the Bills having to pay significantly more than the Pats, there's a couple of reasons why. If you are a team in transition and coming off a 5-11 season, sometimes you have to overpay a bit. And the Pats have a system where they believe they can get any wr to produce. They don't overpay at that position (see Givens). So they were hoping to get PP at a bargain rate. The Bills wanted PP and showed him the money.

 

As for PP being overpaid, I'm not so sure about that. Assuming PP becomes a number #2, here are some of the wr combos in our division. (http://www.nflpa.com/Members/main.asp?subPage=Active+Player+Search)

 

Pats

Branch 1,045,000

Brown 810,000

(doesn't include Chad Jackson their 2nd round pick and likely #2)

 

Dolphins

Chambers 1,600,000

Booker 3,000,000

 

Jets

Coles 2,000,000

McCareins 2,242,000

 

Bills

Evans 542,500

Price 800,000

 

Of course, this doesn't factor in signing bonuses but the Bills don't look so bad. I think it would be wrong to ever discount the importance of Moulds to this offense. He was routinely double teamed and drew coverages to his side of the field. However, he has clearly lost a step and most importantly, he didn't want to be here. Additionally, PP has earned nothing here. He will have to fight to earn playing time. Hopefully being humbled in his hometown and trying to earn a spot will bring out the best in PP.

[Dawgg]

Mularkey essentially aliented his entire team by suspending Moulds -- not a very smart move when you are a rookie head coach. Don't blame this on Moulds' silence, he brought it upon himself. The bottom line is that not all players are treated equally. If Freddie Smith pulled that maneuver, you suspend and bench him. Moulds, on the other hand, had too good a history and too much seniority to be treated that way. Despite that fact, Moulds kept his mouth shut and returned to work.

 

He was not being used properly and the blame for that falls sqarely on the coaches. You look at a player like Rod Smith who puts up numbers year in and year out on the wrong side of 30 and you realize how critical it is to have a coaching staff that knows how to utilize the weapons on the roster.

 

As for the "Mort Report," his rendition of the story was embellished... talking about listening to music in the locker room and not paying any attention to what the coaches said. From what i heard, that was completely false. All this was a reaction to a heated argument between Moulds, MM and Graves on the sideline.

 

And frankly, this is simply my opinion. He pulled a Cris Carter and let Mularkey take a lot of the blame when Mularkey was the guy not saying anything to the press and getting crucified himself. Mularkey didn't do anything wrong here (except run a crappy offense), Moulds did. And yet Moulds, by his silence, let Mularkey take a load of crap.

705256[/snapback]

[Dawgg]

Yes, I was probably being harsh, you're right.

 

With that being said, I just don't understand the way in which this team spent its money. You get rid of Moulds because he has a big cap hit but then you sign Price and Reed to a combined $20 million over 4 years to go along with another high draft pick Roscoe Parrish. I would much rather combine the salary given to Price and Reed and get a proven vet like Keyshawn Johnson or David Givens. Price, in my opinion is not what this team needs. He's another burner who can beat you deep -- last I checked, that was the same description given to Evans and Parrish.

 

To call PP a worthless schmuck is a little harsh don't you think?  Yes, the guy has fallen off quite a bit from his days in Buffalo.  However, WR is the position that depends on so many other variables.  You need the line to hold their blocks and the QB to make his right reads and deliver the ball.  I remember a few years ago, Vick was sacked more than Bledsoe.  How in the world does that happen?  Well, maybe their line wasn't that great.  Or perhaps, Vick took too long making his reads.  Additionally, Vick would look to run before routes had a chance to develop (PP is a strong route runner).  Plus, Vick is not the most accurate passer to begin with.  Point is that there is more to a wr's production falling off than just them being a "worthless schmuck."  As another poster point out, guys like Galloway and Glenn are similar speed wrs who had a couple of down years and rebound last year in a big way in the right system.

 

As for the Bills having to pay significantly more than the Pats, there's a couple of reasons why.  If you are a team in transition and coming off a 5-11 season, sometimes you have to overpay a bit.  And the Pats have a system where they believe they can get any wr to produce.  They don't overpay at that position (see Givens).  So they were hoping to get PP at a bargain rate.  The Bills wanted PP and showed him the money.

 

As for PP being overpaid, I'm not so sure about that.  Assuming PP becomes a number #2, here are some of the wr combos in our division.  (http://www.nflpa.com/Members/main.asp?subPage=Active+Player+Search)

 

Pats

Branch              1,045,000

Brown                810,000

(doesn't include Chad Jackson their 2nd round pick and likely #2)

 

Dolphins

Chambers          1,600,000

Booker              3,000,000

 

Jets

Coles                2,000,000

McCareins          2,242,000

 

Bills

Evans                542,500

Price                  800,000

 

Of course, this doesn't factor in signing bonuses but the Bills don't look so bad.  I think it would be wrong to ever discount the importance of Moulds to this offense.  He was routinely double teamed and drew coverages to his side of the field.  However, he has clearly lost a step and most importantly, he didn't want to be here.  Additionally, PP has earned nothing here.  He will have to fight to earn playing time.  Hopefully being humbled in his hometown and trying to earn a spot will bring out the best in PP. 

705278[/snapback]

[Kelly the Dog]

Mularkey essentially aliented his entire team by suspending Moulds -- not a very smart move when you are a rookie head coach.  Don't blame this on Moulds' silence, he brought it upon himself.  The bottom line is that not all players are treated equally.  If Freddie Smith pulled that maneuver, you suspend and bench him.  Moulds, on the other hand, had too good a history and too much seniority to be treated that way.  Despite that fact, Moulds kept his mouth shut and returned to work.

 

He was not being used properly and the blame for that falls sqarely on the coaches.  You look at a player like Rod Smith who puts up numbers year in and year out on the wrong side of 30 and you realize how critical it is to have a coaching staff that knows how to utilize the weapons on the roster.

 

As for the "Mort Report," his rendition of the story was embellished... talking about listening to music in the locker room and not paying any attention to what the coaches said. From what i heard, that was completely false.  All this was a reaction to a heated argument between Moulds, MM and Graves on the sideline.

705287[/snapback]

The halftime thing is immaterial, whether it is true or not matters not. What matters is that Moulds took himself out of a game, up 21-0, and then refused to go back in. That is INEXCUSABLE as a professional athlete, especially making one making 6 million dollars. It doesn't matter what led up to it. I agree with Moulds the offense was handled terrible, the coaching was terrible, he gave his entire career to the Bills and this team and he had little to show.

 

His frustration was TOTALLY understandable and valid. His reaction to it was TOTALLY INEXCUSABLE and INVALID under any circumstance. He cost his team and teammates and fans the game by taking himself out of it and then not going back in when told to. Miami immediately took away our passing game and we would have won had Moulds been in there. It's hard to argue against that although it's impossible to ever know either way. But the evidence is crystal clear.

 

Moulds was 100% in the wrong regardless of the coaching blunders and i totally agree with him and you about them. That doesn't justify the action one iota.

 

That shows what he means to the team and offense. Again, I am not denying his talent or his career. But in your posts you're implying that what he did was okay under the circumstances and that is totally false. There is zero excuse for it. Zero.

[C.Biscuit97]

Yes, I was probably being harsh, you're right.

 

With that being said, I just don't understand the way in which this team spent its money.  You get rid of Moulds because he has a big cap hit but then you sign Price and Reed to a combined $20 million over 4 years to go along with another high draft pick Roscoe Parrish.  I would much rather combine the salary given to Price and Reed and get a proven vet like Keyshawn Johnson or David Givens.  Price, in my opinion is not what this team needs. He's another burner who can beat you deep -- last I checked, that was the same description given to Evans and Parrish.

705289[/snapback]

 

No worries. For the life of me, I don't understand the Reed re-signing (although I guess he is at least a different type of wr). And a guy like Keyshawn (who I can't stand) or Givens would have been good additions. However, Keyshawn was never gonna come here and Givens got big money. I just think that PP was just in a bad situation in Atlanta. He was more that just a deep burner when he was here. He ran crossing routes with the best of them. He definitely still has talent and if he can be a productive #2 wr, he will be worth the money. As for Roscoe, I like the guy a lot. However, I think he is going to get lost on our depth chart and be looked at as another bad TD decision.

[dave mcbride]

To call PP a worthless schmuck is a little harsh don't you think?  Yes, the guy has fallen off quite a bit from his days in Buffalo.  However, WR is the position that depends on so many other variables.  You need the line to hold their blocks and the QB to make his right reads and deliver the ball.  I remember a few years ago, Vick was sacked more than Bledsoe.  How in the world does that happen?  Well, maybe their line wasn't that great.  Or perhaps, Vick took too long making his reads.  Additionally, Vick would look to run before routes had a chance to develop (PP is a strong route runner).  Plus, Vick is not the most accurate passer to begin with.  Point is that there is more to a wr's production falling off than just them being a "worthless schmuck."  As another poster point out, guys like Galloway and Glenn are similar speed wrs who had a couple of down years and rebound last year in a big way in the right system.

 

As for the Bills having to pay significantly more than the Pats, there's a couple of reasons why.  If you are a team in transition and coming off a 5-11 season, sometimes you have to overpay a bit.  And the Pats have a system where they believe they can get any wr to produce.  They don't overpay at that position (see Givens).  So they were hoping to get PP at a bargain rate.  The Bills wanted PP and showed him the money.

 

As for PP being overpaid, I'm not so sure about that.  Assuming PP becomes a number #2, here are some of the wr combos in our division.  (http://www.nflpa.com/Members/main.asp?subPage=Active+Player+Search)

 

Pats

Branch              1,045,000

Brown                810,000

(doesn't include Chad Jackson their 2nd round pick and likely #2)

 

Dolphins

Chambers          1,600,000

Booker              3,000,000

 

Jets

Coles                2,000,000

McCareins          2,242,000

 

Bills

Evans                542,500

Price                  800,000

 

Of course, this doesn't factor in signing bonuses but the Bills don't look so bad.  I think it would be wrong to ever discount the importance of Moulds to this offense.  He was routinely double teamed and drew coverages to his side of the field.  However, he has clearly lost a step and most importantly, he didn't want to be here.  Additionally, PP has earned nothing here.  He will have to fight to earn playing time.  Hopefully being humbled in his hometown and trying to earn a spot will bring out the best in PP. 

705278[/snapback]

excellent post.

[dave mcbride]

No worries.    For the life of me, I don't understand the Reed re-signing (although I guess he is at least a different type of wr).  And a guy like Keyshawn (who I can't stand) or Givens would have been good additions.  However, Keyshawn was never gonna come here and Givens got big money.  I just think that PP was just in a bad situation in Atlanta.  He was more that just a deep burner when he was here.  He ran crossing routes with the best of them.  He definitely still has talent and if he can be a productive #2 wr, he will be worth the money.  As for Roscoe, I like the guy a lot.  However, I think he is going to get lost on our depth chart and be looked at as another bad TD decision.

705303[/snapback]

my basically uninformed guess is that parrish will be the odd man out, except as a punt returner (not an unimportant task, of course). he might add 15 catches or so as well.

 

here's a quick prediction on reception totals (i'm guessing we'll do better than our 268 receptions last year but far worse than our 380 receptions in 2002). the median # of receptions by a team last year was 302:

 

evans - 68

price - 60

reed - 35

mcgahee - 26

williams/a-train/whoever - 18

royal - 26

everett - 21

davis - 18

parrish - 15

aiken - 9

cieslak - 8

neufeld - 2

 

306 receptions total (which would have ranked them 15th in 05).

[C.Biscuit97]

my basically uninformed guess is that parrish will be the odd man out, except as a punt returner (not an unimportant task, of course). he might add 15 catches or so as well. 

 

here's a quick prediction on reception totals (i'm guessing we'll do better than our 268 receptions last year but far worse than our 380 receptions in 2002). the median # of receptions by a team last year was 302:

 

evans - 68

price - 60

reed - 35

mcgahee - 26

williams/a-train/whoever - 18

royal - 26

everett - 21

davis - 18

parrish - 15

aiken - 9

cieslak - 8

neufeld - 2

 

306 receptions total (which would have ranked them 15th in 05).

705423[/snapback]

 

Impressive breakdown. Props to you.

 

As a whole, I think receptions is one of most overrated stats in football, along with completion percentage. I think yards per catch/ throw are more important. Granted, it is important to keep the chains moving but the more plays on a drive, the more chance for a breakdown or turnover. If a team get some big plays of 20 or more yards, this can change the entire complexion of a game. So if your predictions of 60 plus catches for Evans and Price is correct, let's hope they can keep their yards per catch high. This could be a very dangerous offense. I also would hope for more catches by Willis and get him into open space. But I definitely could live with these totals.

[Nanker]

"Yards AFTER the catch are the most important." Marv Levy

[Sisyphean Bills]

do you think it may have something to do with, you know, the qb?

704832[/snapback]

 

Why is it OK to quote numbers and blame Price's failures on his QB and then claim Moulds is all washed up based on his numbers?

 

It makes no sense and is hypocritical homerism. It doesn't explain why Price was cut in Dallas even though Drew Bledsoe was his QB there -- the same Drew Bledsoe that made Price's stock soar when he was traded to Atlanta. It doesn't explain why the Bills passing game was atrocious in the one game Moulds was suspended last year -- 181 yards, 3 ints, and 37% comp. just plain sucks. (Moulds had 1 less reception than the entire team the very next week.)

[Sisyphean Bills]

And frankly, this is simply my opinion. He pulled a Cris Carter and let Mularkey take a lot of the blame when Mularkey was the guy not saying anything to the press and getting crucified himself. Mularkey didn't do anything wrong here (except run a crappy offense), Moulds did. And yet Moulds, by his silence, let Mularkey take a load of crap.

705256[/snapback]

 

I agree that Moulds handled that situation very badly. It was a TO sort of move (if true, and not saying that it wasn't). But, remember, he paid for it with a suspension. Saying Moulds took no heat and Mularkey took it all is distorted.

 

I fail to see Mularkey as an innocent bystander in this. Mularkey was part of the brain lock that dumped Drew Bledsoe and who thought they could force JP Losman into the starting role -- some sort of manly man penis-size ritual contest with Bill Cowher. Mularkey was not a leader and Moulds was far from the only player that apparently had little respect for the guy. Moulds exploded in an unprofessional way, but dealing with buffoonery and gross incompetence on a day to day basis is definitely not an easy task. I've been there and it often takes an explosion or 20 to get things fixed. (The fact that Mularkey was shown zero respect by many team leaders (not just Moulds) tells me everything I want to know about his leadership abilities.)

[dave mcbride]

Why is it OK to quote numbers and blame Price's failures on his QB and then claim Moulds is all washed up based on his numbers?

 

It makes no sense and is hypocritical homerism.  It doesn't explain why Price was cut in Dallas even though Drew Bledsoe was his QB there -- the same Drew Bledsoe that made Price's stock soar when he was traded to Atlanta.  It doesn't explain why the Bills passing game was atrocious in the one game Moulds was suspended last year -- 181 yards, 3 ints, and 37% comp. just plain sucks.  (Moulds had 1 less reception than the entire team the very next week.)

705677[/snapback]

amazing. i *never* said moulds was washed up. in fact, i said he was better than price hands down.

[dave mcbride]

I agree that Moulds handled that situation very badly.  It was a TO sort of move (if true, and not saying that it wasn't).  But, remember, he paid for it with a suspension.  Saying Moulds took no heat and Mularkey took it all is distorted.

 

I fail to see Mularkey as an innocent bystander in this.  Mularkey was part of the brain lock that dumped Drew Bledsoe and who thought they could force JP Losman into the starting role -- some sort of manly man penis-size ritual contest with Bill Cowher.  Mularkey was not a leader and Moulds was far from the only player that apparently had little respect for the guy.  Moulds exploded in an unprofessional way, but dealing with buffoonery and gross incompetence on a day to day basis is definitely not an easy task.  I've been there and it often takes an explosion or 20 to get things fixed.  (The fact that Mularkey was shown zero respect by many team leaders (not just Moulds) tells me everything I want to know about his leadership abilities.)

705698[/snapback]

based on what i've heard and read over the past 2 years, i have concluded that it's more likely than not that a) wilson demanded that bledsoe be shown the door (after the pitt game) and b) wilson demanded that losman be benched after the second NE game this past year. whatever you think of mularkey, he's highly regarded in the nfl and always came across as a sensible, low-BS guy. don't you think it's mighty strange that he *quit* his job as an nfl head coach?? i mean that's amazing. if there was nothing behind it, you'd think that a number of teams would have been hesitant about contacting him. but they weren't hesitant -- in fact he had multiple suitors, and ended up as OC for one of the richest and most storied teams in the league that just happens to have a great head coach.