If the Bills win the Super Bowl within 3 years

[Olaf Fub]

If the Bills win a SB, it will be 99 percent attributable to the players, multiple levels of coaches and the current GM. They are the ones who coordinate everything done that year.

 

I'll give TD the 1 percent just b/c he provided a pretty good example of how not to run the organization.

 

As an analogy (which are dangerous on this board, don't you know): Joe Blow is building  a stone wall, is 1/3 completed and it's about ready to keel over b/c he uses the wrong techniques of fitting stone. He gets fired by the homeowner. If I take that wall down but reuse the stones in different combinations and create a masterpiece that's entered in Better Homes and Gardens, does Joe Blow deserve any credit?

710025[/snapback]

 

I think this is a great analogy. Ultimately, A GM should be judged by how the organization performs as a team. Were the Bills sucessful under TD? Hell no!

 

He had all the players metioned in the "Super Bowl" team above and was able to produce a 5-11 season. If this happens (and I hope it does) he shouldn't receive credit for their success. (and if the Bills stink for the next 3 years, he shouldn't get the blame. Marv's the GM now, he gets the lion's share of credit or blame. He has the most influence on what the team looks like in 2006 and beyond.)

 

Just bringing some talent into an organization isn't enough to make you a good GM. A GM's job is to build a team that wins. Look at Mike Milbury in the NHL. The Islanders drafted practically a who's-who of all stars while he was GM. He traded most of the talent away for short term fixes and the Isles were an average to poor team for his entire term.

[Kelly the Dog]

I think this is a great analogy. Ultimately, A GM should be judged by how the organization performs as a team. Were the Bills sucessful under TD? Hell no!

 

He had all the players metioned in the "Super Bowl" team above and was able to produce a 5-11 season. If this happens (and I hope it does) he shouldn't receive credit for their success. (and if the Bills stink for the next 3 years, he shouldn't get the blame. Marv's the GM now, he gets the lion's share of credit or blame. He has the most influence on what the team looks like in 2006 and beyond.)

 

Just bringing some talent into an organization isn't enough to make you a good GM. A GM's job is to build a team that wins. Look at Mike Milbury in the NHL. The Islanders drafted practically a who's-who of all stars while he was GM. He traded most of the talent away for short term fixes and the Isles were an average to poor team for his entire term.

710226[/snapback]

A GM's job is also to make money for the owner, to get people in the seats, to keep the team from potential future cap jail, to be in control of the facilities, training camp, etc. TD excelled at those elements. It's isn't really ALL about winning and losing. I think he deserved and probably needed to be fired, but there were a lot of good things he did, too, which are a large part of the GM's job that he gets little to no credit for.

[Dibs]

A GM's job is also to make money for the owner, to get people in the seats, to keep the team from potential future cap jail, to be in control of the facilities, training camp, etc. TD excelled at those elements. It's isn't really ALL about winning and losing. I think he deserved and probably needed to be fired, but there were a lot of good things he did, too, which are a large part of the GM's job that he gets little to no credit for.

710251[/snapback]

I agree. An area where I feel TBD diverges from the norm is that generally the major element of perceived success/failure of a teams performance falls onto the coach. Here at TBD there is the feel that said major element falls onto the GM. In the real world, if a team wins it all, the coach is a genius. If the team fails, the coach is run out of town. Hell, I don't even know who half of the GMs are around the league.

I know the GM selects the coach & therefore is responsible but.....

I'm (slowly)reading Marvs Autobiography. Throughout his coaching career he had 'power struggles' as a coach with the GMs he had(mainly at K.C.). He insisted on having the final say in all football & personnel matters which is how it should be.

TD made some bad decisions. Obviously they outweighed the good ones he made.

He was not however coach of the team.

 

Strangely enough I continually find myself 'feeling' that Marv is the HC. I have to remind myself that it is DJ who will be calling the shots...hopefully listening intelligently to Marvs views. Upon reading Marvs thoughts on the role of the HC & GM I fully believe the final say on all football/coaching/personnel decisions will be DJs. I cannot see Marv not respecting his HCs decisions.

[Orton's Arm]

Most of the key players will be TD acquisitions: Losman, McGahee, Evans, Peters, McGee, Spikes, Crowell, Schobel and maybe Clements. 

Fletcher & Villarrial, Posey, Moorman, Lindell

with Gandy & Vincent as argueables.

 

That's 14(16) players.  As I said in my earlier post, I think that's about average for an NFL team.  Most teams(average) are continually looking to upgrade in lots of areas.

I agree with Albany,n.y. in that TD was a disaster picking head coaches.  The talent should have performed much better last year.

You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel with Posey. Vincent and Villarrial are too old to provide much help to a hypothetical 2007 or 2008 Super Bowl team, and Fletcher will be on his last legs.

 

Look at all the Butler draft picks and UDFAs for the Bills, who are still in the league: Antoine Winfield, Antoine Smith (I think), Pat Williams, Eric Moulds, Peerless Price, Travares Tillman, Bryce Fisher, Ruben Brown, and probably others that I'm forgetting. In 2006, will those guys collectively contribute more to their teams than TD's draft picks and UDFAs will contribute to the Bills? Quite possibly, and that's not any kind of indication of TD success.

[Dan]

Upon reading Marvs thoughts on the role of the HC & GM I fully believe the final say on all football/coaching/personnel decisions will be DJs.  I cannot see Marv not respecting his HCs decisions.

710321[/snapback]

 

I agree with you. And I'll go a step further and suggest that's why Marv hired Jauron. He wanted a head coach that he saw eye to eye with. In that way, they're on the same page and providing the much needed direction to the franchise.

[Dibs]

Quite possibly, and that's not any kind of indication of TD success.

710332[/snapback]

But nobody is saying TD was a success.

Honestly HA, I think you often make very good points & you make them with a smile(which I like) & I don't disrespect you....however.....I feel you are a tad fixated on the whole TD/success thing. I don't think he was a success, & as far as I'm aware I have never stated he was one(unless you include pre-Bills day ).

 

Our differences(as far as I can tell) are over how big a failure he was, not over weather he was one. In fact, I stated him as 'average' in the post you quoted me from in regards to talent input & I called him 'a disaster ' in regards to picking head coaches.

I have also questioned(later post) the concept that TD might not have had as big a contribution to the talent acquisitions as we assume....he certainly wouldn't have if Marv was his coach.

Actually, if someone knows how the Coach/GM relationship ran with TD, I'm quite interested to find out.

[ganesh]

Just look at Pittsburgh....TD left and in 5 years they win the SB with their

own home grown talent....TD will not get any credit, even if some of

his players remain on this team...If this team is going to win the SB, it

will be more because of the team they are building now.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Just look at Pittsburgh....TD left and in 5 years they win the SB with their

own home grown talent....TD will not get any credit, even if some of

his players remain on this team...If this team is going to win the SB, it

will be more because  of the team they are building now.

710409[/snapback]

 

Very few of the players on the Steelers Super Bowl team were brought to Pittsburgh during TD's watch. There were a few, like Bettis, but the bulk of the team was built after Donahoe was fired in the Steel city.

[Sisyphean Bills]

I agree.  An area where I feel TBD diverges from the norm is that generally the major element of perceived success/failure of a teams performance falls onto the coach.  Here at TBD there is the feel that said major element falls onto the GM.  In the real world, if a team wins it all, the coach is a genius.  If the team fails, the coach is run out of town.  Hell, I don't even know who half of the GMs are around the league.

I know the GM selects the coach & therefore is responsible but.....

 

It's not simply because the GM hired the coaches; although, that is a part of it. Donahoe was a big-time micromanager and wanted his fingerprints all over the organization. Everything from potholes to sitting in the coach's box and telling the offensive coordinator what plays to run. The GM takes a lot of shots around here because people understand that the GM was the man behind the curtain. The Bills had weak and ineffective coaches because TD wanted powerless lackeys who would defer to him.

[Kelly the Dog]

It's not simply because the GM hired the coaches; although, that is a part of it.  Donahoe was a big-time micromanager and wanted his fingerprints all over the organization.  Everything from potholes to sitting in the coach's box and telling the offensive coordinator what plays to run.  The GM takes a lot of shots around here because people understand that the GM was the man behind the curtain.  The Bills had weak and ineffective coaches because TD wanted powerless lackeys who would defer to him.

710475[/snapback]

That argument holds no water with me. Gregg Williams is a strong-minded, strong willed coach. To the point of being non-pliable. He came right out day one saying we're doing things my way and actually came on way too strong. TD never strong-armed him, in fact, it seems like just the opposite was true and that Williams was allowed to choose his OC Gilbride over TD's reticence and even worse, allowed to keep him even after TD probably should have stepped in when he didn't. Mularkey, too, even though proved to be a poor choice, did things his own way and it backfired on him, rather than TD pulling the strings.

 

What you proposed, and others have, too, is an easy thing to say or to think it may have been that way but a look at what actually happened as well as what was reported, as well as what was said, seems all participants seemed to be just the opposite.

[Mickey]

First off, a caveat: any opinion on this topic is total speculative BS given the variables involved. For example, if we win that SB with Craig Nall finishing the year as MVP or with Losman as a superstar.

 

That having been said, if done all in good fun, this kind of thing is good offseason entertainment for us. So please, don't get all upset over anything I write here, I know it is a BS opinion so there is no need to lambaste me for it.

 

I wouldn't give TD any credit. I arrived at that based on starting with what I thought would be the best case scenario for an argument that he should be given credit. I think the draft pick that defined him as a GM for me was the McGahee pick. When he took JP, we needed a QB whether it be that year or the next so I think any GM would have been looking for a QB in the draft and given where we picked, I don't think it was particularly daring or inspired to take JP.

 

When he took big Mike, now known as the "big bust", we were desperate for an OL and so he took one. If it hadn't have been Williams, it would have been McKinnie. I think almost any GM would have decided we needed an OT bad in that draft and would have found Williams to be just as promising as TD did.

 

The Willis pick was gutsy, maybe even stupid depending on what one thought back then of his ability to rehab that awful injury. We had a decent RB and had other needs. Any other GM probably would have passed on Willis, maybe TD should have but that doesn't matter. I think because hardly any other GM would have taken that leap makes that pick the one that defines TD as a GM for me, it was his D-day pick.

 

If we won the SB and did so with Willis having an MVP, Emmett Smith type of season, I think that would be the best case scenario for giving credit to TD but still, even in that case, I wouldn't.

 

The reason is that Willis has shown us that he is a good back already but not one that can overcome a terrible line and an otherwise hapless offense. If Willis does have an MVP year, it will be due to an upgrade on the OL and the offense as a whole whether that be a bettery system, better play calling, better game planning, whatever. TD, even if he did get us a great back (jury still out on that one), he never was able to pair that move with a solid OL or with coaches able to construct a solid offense or, failing that, to come up with something to get offensive production despite its shortcomings talent-wise. Bad linemen and mediocre coaches. That was also part of TD's legacy. Overcoming them, if done by the new regime, will be what makes some TD's other picks worth their weight in gold, be it McGee or McGahee or Roscoe Parrish.

 

Yep, I know, total bs but hey, I haven't got my playbook yet and I have missed all the OPA's (voluntary Organized Posting Activities) so give me a break.

[Orton's Arm]

Our differences(as far as I can tell) are over how big a failure he was, not over weather he was one.  In fact, I stated him as 'average' in the post you quoted me from in regards to talent input & I called him 'a disaster ' in regards to picking head coaches.

Fair enough. But if TD was average in terms of talent input, why don't the Bills have average talent? When TD left, the starters were as follows (+ indicates above average for a starter, 0 indicates average, - is for below average):

 

Offense

Gandy 0

Anderson -

Teague -

Villarrial - (based on age and injuries)

Peters 0 (based on potential versus how much he's actually proven)

Campbell -

QB Losman/Holcomb - (most teams are more comfortable at QB than the Bills)

McGahee 0

FB -

Moulds 0 (below average for a #1, especially based on future potential)

Evans 0 (better than average for a #2)

 

Defense

Shobel +

Anderson -

Edwards -

Kelsay/Denny -

Posey -

Fletcher 0 (based on age and future potential)

Spikes/Crowell 0 (based on concern for Spikes recovering from injury)

Clements +

McGee +

Vincent -

Milloy -

 

Totals

+'s: 3

0's: 7

-'s: 12

 

For TD to be considered average at talent evaluation, there should be as many above-average players as there are below-average players. But the numbers are even more lopsided than they look. Of the three players who have proven themselves above-average for starters, Clements is halfway out the door. Of the seven average players TD found or retained, Moulds isn't here anymore, and Fletcher may be in his last year.

[Dibs]

Fair enough.  But if TD was average in terms of talent input, why don't the Bills have average talent?  When TD left, the starters were as follows (+ indicates above average for a starter, 0 indicates average, - is for below average):

 

Offense

Gandy 0

Anderson -

Teague -

Villarrial - (based on age and injuries)

Peters 0 (based on potential versus how much he's actually proven)

Campbell -

QB Losman/Holcomb - (most teams are more comfortable at QB than the Bills)

McGahee 0

FB -

Moulds 0 (below average for a #1, especially based on future potential)

Evans 0 (better than average for a #2)

 

Defense

Shobel +

Anderson -

Edwards -

Kelsay/Denny -

Posey -

Fletcher 0 (based on age and future potential)

Spikes/Crowell 0 (based on concern for Spikes recovering from injury)

Clements +

McGee +

Vincent -

Milloy -

 

Totals

+'s: 3

0's: 7

-'s: 12

 

For TD to be considered average at talent evaluation, there should be as many above-average players as there are below-average players.  But the numbers are even more lopsided than they look.  Of the three players who have proven themselves above-average for starters, Clements is halfway out the door.  Of the seven average players TD found or retained, Moulds isn't here anymore, and Fletcher may be in his last year.

710615[/snapback]

I'm not picking on you here HA, I see a lot on TBD think similar to you on this but I do not.

What I'm getting at is the term 'average'. If you take your defensive grades it reflects what a bad performance we had....but only 1 year before we had the #2 Defense for the second year running. Can the players all be really as bad as your grades? Had you graded them then, I think your grades would have been resoundingly higher.

As an example of 'average'(according to Dibs)

32 players at a possition. (Double for OLB types)

Top 10 good.

Bottom 10 bad

Middle 12 Average

These numbers probably should be closer to 8,8,16 for most positions.

Basically your gradings state that there are 22-24 FSs better than TV....or Fletcher is not in the top 10 at his possition....or there are 44-48 OLBs better than Possey.....or 44-48 DEs better than our Kelsay/Denny combo.

 

Just because they play in Buffalo does not mean the expectations are higher than for players not playing in Buffalo.

Try listing off actual players better than ours & you'll find you run out of names pretty quickly for most possitions. Mind you it is similar if you list players worse than ours. This is because the talent we have(generally) is average.

 

My original line was "Pretty much any other GM would have left Marv with a similar amount of usable talent on the roster."

When I look around the league I don't feel we are devoid of talent & in the pits of dispair. Hell, just on performance, if we had better play-calling & drive we would have ended up right in the middle of the league.

[krazykat]

If the Bills win the Super Bowl within 3 years, Should TD get some credit?

If the sun rises in the west tomorrow, should I go back to bed?

[Albany,n.y.]

If the sun rises in the west tomorrow, should I go back to bed?

710875[/snapback]

 

Not until you thank Tedy Bruschi for the miracle.

[H2o]

This falls along the same lines as the Notre Dame situation. Everyone wanted to say that it was Ty Willingham who created last years resurgent Irish squad because they were all basically his recruits. But the truth is, he had the same people up under his wings and couldn't even make a bowl game. Charlie Weis is the man who brought these guys together, turned Quinn into a superstar, and put us back up around the top of the College Football world. If someone comes in here to Buffalo and gets it done, bringing us the long awaited SBC we covet, then the current GM, owner, and coaching staff should get all the credit in the world. The only credit from us TD should get is the same kind of credit the eagles give T.O. Thanks for almost completely running our franchise under with your decision making and whatnot TD!!! Atleast T.O. got his team to a Superbowl one year before imploding the team, we didn't even get into the playoffs.

[tennesseeboy]

3years? that's three full drafts for the ML/DJ combination plus whatever trades they make. I think if we win the superbowl with pro bowl playing of Losman, McGahee and Spikes (Fletcher and other TD acquisitions will be gone by then) I'd give TD a little bit of credit. More likely we would win it with the ML/DJ team. Its nice to think about who we would give credit to for winning the superbowl rather than who to blame for a 4 win season.

[MDH]

Offense

Gandy 0

Anderson -

Teague -

Villarrial - (based on age and injuries)

Peters 0 (based on potential versus how much he's actually proven)

Campbell -

QB Losman/Holcomb - (most teams are more comfortable at QB than the Bills)

McGahee 0

FB -

Moulds 0 (below average for a #1, especially based on future potential)

Evans 0 (better than average for a #2)

 

Defense

Shobel +

Anderson -

Edwards -

Kelsay/Denny -

Posey -

Fletcher 0 (based on age and future potential)

Spikes/Crowell 0 (based on concern for Spikes recovering from injury)

Clements +

McGee +

Vincent -

Milloy -

 

Totals

+'s: 3

0's: 7

-'s: 12

710615[/snapback]

 

You appear to be doing your best to give the Bills low grades whenever possible. TD can't control injuries and you need to forget the "(based on age and future potential)" stuff because that's all based on your negative speculation, not on actual production. I suppose it does depend on how one defines "average" but I'd say you've ranked many of the players lower than their production warrants (bad teams, and the Bills are certainly that, aren’t bad because every single player on their roster sucks).

 

Villariel is a decent player and by no means has his production been below average. He's the definition of a hard-nosed average player. He won't star on any lines but many teams would be happy having a player like him on their line.

 

Not only is Shelton not a below average FB he's an above average one. He struggled at times last season but given his production previously he's considered by many to be one of the best blocking fullbacks in the league (check out the latest Pro Football Weekly guide). While I don't agree with that stellar report he's still above average.

 

Fletcher is an above average LB, trying to sell it any other way is disingenuous.

 

Spikes is an above average LB, one of the best in the league in fact. You can't count it against TD that Spikes was injured and his status is unknown. Those things happen and it shouldn’t reflect poorly on the GM when they do (unless one is trying to create an argument stating how bad a GM is, then everything counts against him I suppose).

 

McGahee, while not a top tier back, if definitely above average, particularly considering the OL he runs behind.

 

I can't say I can argue with most of your other ratings (though I could see some people disagreeing with Teague and Milloy. Milloy was bad last year but much of that could be attributed to injury. Before that injury he was an average S).

 

So if you reconfigure the totals you have based on the above it looks like this:

+'s: 7

0's: 5

-'s: 10

 

While the above isn't really a vindication of the job TD did I think the other poster is spot on. TD needed to be fired but he wasn't nearly as bad as many here want to make him sound.

[Bill from NYC]

You appear to be doing your best to give the Bills low grades whenever possible.  TD can't control injuries and you need to forget the "(based on age and future potential)" stuff because that's all based on your negative speculation, not on actual production.  I suppose it does depend on how one defines "average" but I'd say you've ranked most of the players lower than their production warrants (bad teams, and the Bills are certainly that, aren’t bad because every single player on their roster sucks).

 

Villariel is a decent player and by no means has his production been below average.  He's the definition of a hard-nosed average player.  He won't star on any lines but many teams would be happy having a player like him on their line.

 

Not only is Shelton not a below average FB he's an above average one.  He struggled at times last season but given his production previously he's considered by many to be one of the best blocking fullbacks in the league (check out the latest Pro Football Weekly guide).  While I don't agree with that stellar report he's still above average.

 

Fletcher is an above average LB, trying to sell it any other way is disingenuous.

 

Spikes is an above average LB, one of the best in the league in fact.  You can't count it against TD that Spikes was injured and his status is unknown.  Those things happen and it shouldn’t reflect poorly on the GM when they do (unless one is trying to create an argument stating how bad a GM is, then everything counts against him I suppose).

 

McGahee, while not a top tier back, if definitely above average, particularly considering the OL he runs behind.

 

I can't say I can argue with most of your other ratings (though I could see some people disagreeing with Teague and Milloy.  Milloy was bad last year but much of that could be attributed to injury.  Before that injury he was an average S).

 

So if you reconfigure the totals you have based on the above it looks like this:

+'s: 7

0's: 5

-'s: 10

 

While the above isn't really a vindication of the job TD did I think the other poster is spot on.  TD needed to be fired but he wasn't nearly as bad as many here want to make him sound.

711040[/snapback]

 

I agree totally. Simon once challenged me in a PM to see how many GMs did better than TD wrt the draft. I found him to be somewhere in the middle of the pack. In truth, much of this was based on his success in 01.

 

The thing is, his mistakes were of colossal proportion. Williams (an injured, fat RT at #4), Losman (giving away picks) and Parrish were imo unexplainably stupid selections.

 

I guess we will soon see if Levy is any better, but his first draft raised eyebrows to say the least.

[Orton's Arm]

If you take your defensive grades it reflects what a bad performance we had....but only 1 year before we had the #2 Defense for the second year running.  Can the players all be really as bad as your grades? 

There are several points you've made I'd like to address. The first is that the 2004 defense, while good statistically, was by no means the second-best defense in the league. Its stats were inflated because it faced a number of lousy offenses, and the defensive scheme was ideally suited to making bad offenses look awful. But the 2004 defense did a worse job in both Patriots games than the average defense the Patriots faced that year. Moreover, the defense let the team down in games against Jacksonville, the Jets, and Pittsburgh.

 

Despite the fact the 2004 defense was over-hyped and over-rated, it was still probably a top-ten defense. But the loss of Pat Williams and of Takeo Spikes took their toll. Perhaps equally important was the effect caused by the declining levels of play from guys like Lawyer Milloy, Sam Adams, Troy Vincent, Nate Clements, and others. The problem with building a defense via free agency is that guys will hit the wall quickly; as Sam Adams clearly did. The pitiful ranking the defense achieved in 2005 supports the idea it had below-average talent.

 

But mine was intended to be a forward-looking analysis. So even if a guy like London Fletcher had had an above-average season for 2005, it's likely his play will be merely average for 2006 or 2007. Many players on the roster at the end of 2005 were nearing the end of their careers: Sam Adams, Lawyer Milloy, Troy Vincent, London Fletcher, Eric Moulds, Chris Villarrial, Trey Teague, Campbell, and others. Then there were those who were young and unproven: Losman, Parrish, Everett, Geisinger, Preston, Evans, Baker, Peters, etc. It's easy for fans to imagine all of TD's young, unproven players turning into success stories. Some of those unproven players probably will go on to do something, while others follow the lead of Coy Wire, Mike Williams, Ryan Denny, and other TD disappointments.

 

But at the end of 2005, there were very few players on the roster who a) had been in the league long enough to prove something, b) were young enough to have a future, and c) were actually under contract beyond the 2005 season. Schobel fit these criteria, as did McGee, and maybe Evans and McGahee. If you want me to be generous, I'll even give you Crowell. That's four guys, maybe five, upon whom the team can safely rely for at least two years. I find it extremely difficult to believe very many other teams are in similar straits.