Willis's amazing year

[Bill from NYC]

I hope not.  How many times are the Bills going to lose their first round picks after their first contract?  It seems to happen all the time.  Unless I'm forgetting somebody the last 1st round pick that was successful AND the Bills kept past the first contract was Eric Moulds.  That's just pathetic.  This team needs to start holding onto it's first round picks that are successful.

762107[/snapback]

 

Thank you for raising an extremely valid point. History tells us that most of the first round picks we have not re-signed were defensive backs.

This is one of the reasons that I hope that we re-sign Nate. Maybe, just maybe we can end the revolving door of wasted early picks on the secondary. Results speak for themselves. Additionally, I happen to think that Nate is a very good player.

[Nostradamus]

Last year, on the worst offensive team in Bills history. With a terrible and injured offensive line. With atrocious quarterbacking and no deep threat. With the worst play-calling in recent memory. With a defense that didnt turn the ball over. With a divided locker room which basically became Lord of the Flies. With a fullback and tight end who blocked no one. Not playing on third downs. Willis had the fifth best season in Bills running back history with 1247 yards.

 

And he did it without even trying the last eight games or so. 

 

It was rather a remarkable feat. He should put up huge numbers this year, with virtually everything better for him. The coaching, the line, better QBing, a deep threat, better play calling (guaranteed), a tighter locker room, a better blocking TE, and playing on third downs.

761978[/snapback]

And, like they year before, he compiled those yards against teams with porous run defense... in first halfs, and scored a grand total of what, 5 touchdowns? Did you see his runs at the goal line?? Remarkable season?? Revisonist historians would be proud of this post http://images.stadiumwall.com/style_images...icons/icon9.gif

[Kelly the Dog]

And, like they year before, he compiled those yards against teams with porous run defense... in first halfs, and scored a grand total of what, 5 touchdowns? Did you see his runs at the goal line?? Remarkable season?? Revisonist historians would be proud of this post http://images.stadiumwall.com/style_images...icons/icon9.gif

762150[/snapback]

We sucked last year. A large portion of the season Willis even sucked. And yet he still managed to pick up a lot of yards. I think Willis totally gave up on the team halfway through the year and coasted the rest of it. It's inexcusable for a guy to do that and yet he still finished 10th in the league. Around the goalline I remember a bunch of short passes to the fullback while I was screaming to give it to Willis again and again and again. If they did, IMO, he would have had 10 or more TDs, too. Even if he was stopped on first and/or second down for no yardage. The Bills were the most predictable team I ever saw down near the goalline. I don't recall them ever just giving it to him and giving it to him (like they should have) and he was stopped.

[JDG]

1. I never said he had a great year. That is your word. I said it was amazing, because everything that could possibly go wrong went wrong. And he still put up solid but not great numbers. 

 

O.k., so your argument is that Willis had an "amazing" and "remarkable", but not "great season." And that "the fifth best season in Bills history" is "solid, but not great." O.k...... I hope you can forgive my confusion on that little bit of nuance....

 

 

2. It's the fifth best year in Bills history. It's a fact. The NFL itself doesn't make its records a per game average.

 

All this proves to me is that the NFL's record-keeping methodology is not a particularly good indicator of future performance.

 

 

4. You seem to imply, remarkably, that he wouldn't be able to handle the time on third downs when this year's staff intends to do just that. They must be morons, too.

 

Point taken. I didn't mean to suggest that Willis McGahee couldn't handle the workload of 3rd downs - although I do speculate whether his blocking and pass-catching is up to it on a performance level. We shall see in that regard - and I probably shouldn't be putting so much stock into Mularkey's assessment of that. Anyhow, the point I meant to make is that I don't think that playing on 3rd downs will do *that* much to improve upon his putrid 3.8 yards per carry from last season.

 

3. In your criticism of the post, you failed to respond to any single item of the 11 problems with the Bills last year that I mentioned that Willis overcame. And they are monumental, IMO. The only time you came close to it, you compared the (arguably) three best seasons in NFL rushing history to it. And failed to observe or mention that each of those runners and teams had great offensive lines.

762114[/snapback]

 

With a terrible and injured offensive line. With atrocious quarterbacking and no deep threat. With the worst play-calling in recent memory. With a defense that didnt turn the ball over. With a divided locker room which basically became Lord of the Flies. With a fullback and tight end who blocked no one. Not playing on third downs. Willis had the fifth best season in Bills running back history with 1247 yards.

 

And he did it without even trying the last eight games or so.

 

It was rather a remarkable feat. He should put up huge numbers this year, with virtually everything better for him. The coaching, the line, better QBing, a deep threat, better play calling (guaranteed), a tighter locker room, a better blocking TE, and playing on third downs.

 

O.k., let me see if I can identify your 11 problems:

1) a bad offensive line

2) an injured offensive line (seems like double-counting to me)

3) atrocious QB'ing (I did address this)

4) no deep threat (Lee Evans is apparently purely a possession guy, or else you are double-counting the QB play of Losman and Holcomb)

5) poor offensive game design (I did say that this gives me hope for McGahee's improvement)

6) few defensive turnovers (seems irrelevant to me - McGahee had the 11th most carries in the League already)

7) Divided Lockerroom (the lockerroom wanted Holcomb - was McGahee's performance better once the lockerroom was pacified by putting in Holcomb)

8) Poor TE Play (see #1-2)

9) Poor FB Play (see #1-2)

10) Not playing 3rd downs

11) Not trying (there is zero change that "not trying" will cause me to think highly of McGahee - indeed, his quitting last year is a key reason why I am very unwilling to give him the benefit of the doubt here....)

 

In my opinion, your argument boils down to the fact that we should be impressed that McGahee compiled the "5th best season by a Bills RB in history" on a bad team, with bad talent at every offensive position besides WR and bad coaching. Its impossible to argue for an example of a RB that was successful with bad blacking by the OL, FB, and TE - mostly since the performance of these positions is almost assessed *by definition* by the play of the RB. I did however, cite that some of the best RB performances in NFL history have come on teams with terrible QB'ing. In 1973, in particular, Ferguson was essentially Losman-like in his futility.

 

What this really comes down to, though, is that you look at McGahee's 2005 numbers, see the 5th-best season by an RB in Bills history, and are even more impressed by it when you consider the extenuating circumstances. I, on the other hand, look at McGahee's 2005 numbers and see a RB who was basically force-fed the rock over and over again due to the coach's philosophy and the ineptness of the QB play, and that this produced the 5th-best ranking in the NFL's highly flawed way of assessing these things. Looking closer at McGahee's 2005 numbers, I see a RB performance that ranked at the very bottom of the League - meaning that correcting those extenuating circumstances that you see have an awful lot of ground to make up on the rest of the League in order for McGahee to rank among the Top NFL backs in 2006 and justify his lofty draft status.

 

I can only hope that you are right about that...

 

JDG

[JDG]

Thank you for raising an extremely valid point. History tells us that most of the first round picks we have not re-signed were defensive backs.    

This is one of the reasons that I hope that we re-sign Nate. Maybe, just maybe we can end the revolving door of wasted early picks on the secondary.

762128[/snapback]

 

And that would be because Jeff Burris, Thomas Smith, and Antoine Winfield went on to such stellar careers after leaving Buffalo? ;-)

 

All those players started for several years for the Bills, by NFL standards, those are hardly wasted picks (cf. McNown, Cade; Rumph, Mike)

 

JDG

[CosmicBills]

Is it so bad to wish that players would at least pretend to act like they want to win? To be a part of something special?

 

That's where McGahee falls on his face. He should ask himself: if the Bill's didn't pick me up, how far would I have fallen?

 

He doesn't care about winning anything but the big paycheck and has all the humility and gratitude of a used mop.

762097[/snapback]

No, you have a great point. There are players who are great at pretending that they care, and those who aren't. Willis certainly isn't the former.

 

But, when you look at it realistically, even the ones who are gracious are still going to leave for a bigger check. So what stings more? The guy who's upfront about it or the guy who does it behind your back?

 

But I do agree with your sentiment.

[Lv-Bills]

1. I never said he had a great year. That is your word. I said it was amazing, because everything that could possibly go wrong went wrong. And he still put up solid but not great numbers.

 

2. It's the fifth best year in Bills history. It's a fact. The NFL itself doesn't make its records a per game average. Would it make you feel better if I used fifth best in 26 years instead of 46, even if his per game average was better than 80% of all the other 20 seasons we are now omitting because JDG has different standards than the league?   

 

3. In your criticism of the post, you failed to respond to any single item of the 11 problems with the Bills last year that I mentioned that Willis overcame. And they are monumental, IMO. The only time you came close to it, you compared the (arguably) three best seasons in NFL rushing history to it. And failed to observe or mention that each of those runners and teams had great offensive lines.

 

4. You seem to imply, remarkably, that he wouldn't be able to handle the time on third downs when this year's staff intends to do just that. They must be morons, too.

762114[/snapback]

Wow. Rueben Droughns must have had a super duper amazing year then. Cuz, this much and even that much more happened to Rubes and the Cleveland Browns last season. He was even better than Willis was.

 

I must have been sleep walking through two of the most amazing performances in NFL history last season with Droughns and Willis.

 

I'll be sure to pay more attention this season.

[Kelly the Dog]

 

O.k., let me see if I can identify your 11 problems:

1) a bad offensive line

2) an injured offensive line (seems like double-counting to me)

3) atrocious QB'ing (I did address this)

4) no deep threat (Lee Evans is apparently purely a possession guy, or else you are double-counting the QB play of Losman and Holcomb)

5) poor offensive game design (I did say that this gives me hope for McGahee's improvement)

6) few defensive turnovers (seems irrelevant to me - McGahee had the 11th most carries in the League already)

7) Divided Lockerroom (the lockerroom wanted Holcomb - was McGahee's performance better once the lockerroom was pacified by putting in Holcomb)

8) Poor TE Play (see #1-2)

9) Poor FB Play (see #1-2)

10) Not playing 3rd downs

11) Not trying (there is zero change that "not trying" will cause me to think highly of McGahee - indeed, his quitting last year is a key reason why I am very unwilling to give him the benefit of the doubt here....)

 

 

JDG

762168[/snapback]

1. I don't know about you, but I think that bad and injured are two completely different things. I think if you play well on a bad and healthy offensive line, that is pretty good. If you play well on a bad and injured OL, that is twice as good. Perhaps "amazing". It's a huge difference being bad and being injured. The Bills were both, in huge proportions in fact. Really bad and really injured.

2. See 1.

3. Yeah, you addressed it by comparing Willis to the three best rushing years in NFL history. Nice comparison.

4. The Bills had pretty much no deep threat last year for the vast majority of the season. Half of the year automatic with Holcomb playing. Most of the rest of the time we had horrific and erratic play by Losman, no time whatsoever to throw deep from the line, terrible play-calling that abandoned things that did work, sometimes a totally disinterested Moulds, etc. If you believe the Bills were a team to beat you deep last year at most any point in the season, regardless of one player's speed, you are more insane than I think, and it's a pretty high bar you've set so far.

5. Poor offensive game design is one thing, poor play calling within that design was another. We were insanely bad at both.

6. No defensive turnovers is paramount in football to field position. When you have good field position your options open up exponentially. If you are consistently in your own end, it's very, very difficult to get out of it, running and passing. If you are consistently in the other teams end, or near midfield, you can run a lot easier. You learn this in high school.

7. Divided locker room is one of numerous problems the Bills team had off the field in the clusterfukk that was 2005. If you do not think that is a factor in how well the team and individuals play, we will just have to agree that you are nuts.

8. There is a big difference between OL play and TE play. They are two different positions. It helps a RB a lot to have a good TE that can block, and/or a good TE that can stretch the field or be a threat in the passing game. They have little to do with the OL. The Bills had neither. To lump them together is simply ignoring they are different.

9. There is even bigger difference between FB and OL. I'm surprised you haven't noticed. Shelton was lousy last year by most accounts. It helps a RB tremendously to have a good lead blocker. The Bills didnt have one last year. I am hoping Shelton can rebound because I thought he was pretty decent in 2004.

10. Not playing on third downs is self-evident and already discussed. Not to mention that a lot of RB pad their numbers by picking up almost-huge yardage on 3rd-and- huge. See Shaud Willliams.

11. Not trying. This may be the biggest one. Frankly, I don't think Willis tried very hard last year after the 5th game or so. It's just conjecture but I think he (somewhat) threw in the towel after it became crystal clear we werent making the playoffs. He wasn't used to losing on the field and I think he sort of mailed it in. Do I condone this? Hell, no. It's deplorable and indefensible, IMO. But it does make his rather remarkable season all the more remarkable. Think of what he will do when he actually tries the whole year.

[bbills17]

How can anyone not like Willis and his story?  The guy's incredible.

762104[/snapback]

 

I have nothing against him, other than the fact that I don't give a crap about all the stats all the homers on this board spew out. He's been a medicore RB since he's played for the Bills, and anyone that has watched him play vs. a real 'great' RB like Thurman knows that. Give up on all the stats and hype, because it doesn't mean crap. For every great stat you guys mention you can counter it with a pathetic one (how about his ypc). Couple this with his crappy attitude and approach, and we have a RB that is WAY overvalued and hyped by everyone on this board. He'd better have this speed back that everyone talks about this season, otherwise we will be stuck with the same middle-of-the-road RB.

[Kelly the Dog]

Wow.  Rueben Droughns must have had a super duper amazing year then.  Cuz, this much and even that much more happened to Rubes and the Cleveland Browns last season.  He was even better than Willis was.

 

I must have been sleep walking through two of the most amazing performances in NFL history last season with Droughns and Willis.

 

I'll be sure to pay more attention this season.

762178[/snapback]

Rueben Droughns had a pretty remarkable year on a pretty crappy team. It's one of the reasons that Cleveland had some hopes for this year before Bentley and others got hurt. It's also why they got rid of their recent top draft picks at RB. He's a decent, hard-nosed back, but not as good as Willis, IMO. Nowhere did I ever even come close to implying that either one of their seasons was remotely close to almost beginning to approach perhaps being maybe considered to nearly start to imagine to be under consideration for even some of the best seasons in NFL history.

[Kelly the Dog]

I have nothing against him, other than the fact that I don't give a crap about all the stats all the homers on this board spew out.  He's been a medicore RB since he's played for the Bills, and anyone that has watched him play vs. a real 'great' RB like Thurman knows that.  Give up on all the stats and hype, because it doesn't mean crap.  For every great stat you guys mention you can counter it with a pathetic one (how about his ypc).  Couple this with his crappy attitude and approach, and we have a RB that is WAY overvalued and hyped by everyone on this board.  He'd better have this speed back that everyone talks about this season, otherwise we will be stuck with the same middle-of-the-road RB.

762225[/snapback]

Put Willis on the Bills Super Bowl teams and he would explode. Put Thurman on the Bills team of last year and Thurman and the Bills would have still sucked. I am not saying that Willis has come close to being the player that Thurman was yet. Thurman is a Hall of Famer. But you're comparing apples and crayonz right now. Besides, after two years Thurman had 2125 yards, 14 total TDs, and 78 receptions in 31 games. Willis had 2375 yards, 18 total TDs, 50 receptions in 32 games.

[dave mcbride]

Put Willis on the Bills Super Bowl teams and he would explode. Put Thurman on the Bills team of last year and Thurman and the Bills would have still sucked. I am not saying that Willis has come close to being the player that Thurman was yet. Thurman is a Hall of Famer. But you're comparing apples and crayonz right now. Besides, after two years Thurman had 2125 yards, 14 total TDs, and 78 receptions in 31 games. Willis had 2375 yards, 18 total TDs, 50 receptions in 32 games.

762241[/snapback]

isn't someone forgetting to factor in receiving yards? talk about damned statistics ...

[Rubes]

Wow.  Rueben Droughns must have had a super duper amazing year then.  Cuz, this much and even that much more happened to Rubes and the Cleveland Browns last season.

762178[/snapback]

 

 

Why bring me into this?

 

[dave mcbride]

isn't someone forgetting to factor in receiving yards? talk about damned statistics ...

762247[/snapback]

877 receiving yards for thurman; 347 for WM.

[Kelly the Dog]

isn't someone forgetting to factor in receiving yards? talk about damned statistics ...

762247[/snapback]

Fine. Thurman had 877 receiver yards. Willis has 347. So Thurman had 180 yards more yards in two seasons than Willis did. Willis had 4 more TDs. Thurman had a little better YPC. Do you want to argue who had the better team and quarterbacking and OL and coaching and receivers and play-calling and TEs? Talk about damned disingenuousness.

[dave mcbride]

Fine. Thurman had 877 receiver yards. Willis has 347. So Thurman had 230 yards more yards in two seasons than Willis did. Willis had 4 more TDs. Thurman had a little better YPC. Do you want to argue who had the better team and quarterbacking and OL and coaching and receivers and play-calling and TEs? Talk about damned disingenuousness.

762251[/snapback]

i'm simply arguing that thomas was a better player who of course played on a better team. mcgahee is good, though.

 

btw, in the crucial category of yards per touch, thurman's average was 5.15. mcgahee's was 4.13. that's a very significant difference.

[Bill from NYC]

And that would be because Jeff Burris, Thomas Smith, and Antoine Winfield went on to such stellar careers after leaving Buffalo?  ;-)

 

All those players started for several years for the Bills, by NFL standards, those are hardly wasted picks (cf. McNown, Cade; Rumph, Mike)

 

JDG

762175[/snapback]

 

You do have I point. I was thinking that it might be a good idea to build a foundation, instead of using our best resources on little people, only to watch them prance out of town at the first available opportunity, and replace them with more little people. I forgot how many championships were built this way. What was I thinking?

 

Never mind. You are totally correct. Look at how well your method has worked! Please disregard my thoughts and carry on.

[Kelly the Dog]

i'm simply arguing that thomas was a better player who of course played on a better team.  mcgahee is good, though.

 

btw, in the crucial category of yards per touch, thurman's average was 5.15. mcgahee's was 4.13. that's a very significant difference.

762257[/snapback]

And I'm arguing if you put Thurman on this team and Willis on that one, Willis's would very likely be 5.15 or greater and Thurman's would be 4.13 or less.

[dave mcbride]

Fine. Thurman had 877 receiver yards. Willis has 347. So Thurman had 180 yards more yards in two seasons than Willis did. Willis had 4 more TDs. Thurman had a little better YPC. Do you want to argue who had the better team and quarterbacking and OL and coaching and receivers and play-calling and TEs? Talk about damned disingenuousness.

762251[/snapback]

p.s. TDs are a bogus category for judging a running back, in my humble opinion. no one gave a hoot about it before the advent of fantasy football ...

[JDG]

Put Willis on the Bills Super Bowl teams and he would explode. Put Thurman on the Bills team of last year and Thurman and the Bills would have still sucked. I am not saying that Willis has come close to being the player that Thurman was yet. Thurman is a Hall of Famer. But you're comparing apples and crayonz right now. Besides, after two years Thurman had 2125 yards, 14 total TDs, and 78 receptions in 31 games. Willis had 2375 yards, 18 total TDs, 50 receptions in 32 games.

762241[/snapback]

 

Actually, Thurman would have tried last year....