ganesh Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 AND IT IS A CRAPPY DEFENSE! honestly, this "man of the year" crap is really realy nice, but i am sick of seeing our mlb knocked 3 yards backward time and time again on dive plays. there was a play in the 2nd quarter of the jets game where helooked like a superball bouncing off the frikkin pile. good grief marv, i know london's a great guy and all, but let's not break the bank for him...HE'S NOT THAT GOOD! 867468[/snapback] You just took 1 of the 6 points I posted....
Matt in KC Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 See: Sam Cowart. Hey man, I love the both of them as well. As much as you do. But if I am going to hear sh_t all the time about how this is "a business," a la Pat Williams, Antoine Winfield...etc, then we as fans need to look at being fans as a business. Why let the general managment "one up" us? I say, "hell no!!!!" Stand up for what you believe is the right move and stick by it. 867446[/snapback] I hear this all the time, but am confused... Didn't Sam put up just as good stats after the injury (for the Jets)? Sam's Stats from NFL.com are here I think Bills fans just stopped paying attention to him. Regarding your point: I think fan-favorites are a big part of the entertainment aspect of the NFL. But, winning will earn more fan enhusiasm and spending than having the favorites stay and lose. I personally would like to see players I respect trying their best, rather than seeing a bunch of a-holes win in a Bills uniform. Fortunately, we don't really need to chose between the two since there are plenty of up-and-coming players who aren't jerks.
Lori Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 I hear this all the time, but am confused... Didn't Sam put up just as good stats after the injury (for the Jets)? Sam's Stats from NFL.com are here I think Bills fans just stopped paying attention to him. Tackles, perhaps. Game-changing plays, certainly not. Edit: Nah, even that's not true. Guy was leading the entire NFL in tackles when Frank %#$!ing Middleton ended his season in 2000, including at least three games with 20+. He was single-handedly dominating that Tampa Bay game, which is why FM cheapshotted him. That season would've been the first of many Pro Bowl appearances if not for the Achilles injury, IMO... Second edit: BTW, those tackle stats from the NFL.com site don't jibe with the ones in his 2006 Texans media guide bio: 1998 BUF 119 (72 solo/47 asst) 1999 BUF 186 (117 solo/69 asst) 2000 BUF 181 (122 solo/59 asst) 2001 BUF 1 (1 solo) 2002 NYJ 154 (104 solo/50 asst) 2003 NYJ 145 (94 solo/51 asst) 2004 NYJ 23 (18 solo/5 asst) 2005 MIN 104 (70 solo/34 asst) Other stats of note: 5.5 sacks in that 2000 season, 6.0 TOTAL in the years since then. Four INTs in Buffalo, none since then. Four forced fumbles/three recoveries in BUF, 2/1 in Jersey/MIN. He was still a good LB once he recovered from the injury, but he was a friggin' GREAT one before it.
Matt in KC Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 Tackles, perhaps. Game-changing plays, certainly not. 867804[/snapback] I agree that 2000 was (and 2001 would have been!) his most dominant year, I dispute that he was never the same after (because of) his injury. He had 96 solo tackles in 2003 (140 when you count assists), and a couple sacks. That's pretty darn good. Good enough, that it is not clear that the injury caused him to "never be the same." If Takeo returns next year and has Cowart's stats from two years after his injury ( in 2002: 127 tackles | 2 sacks | 8 passes defended) I'll be thrilled. That is worth what he's scheduled to make, even without considering his leadership and other team needs. This is my argument that deciding now to cut Spikes next year is premature.
Alaska Darin Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 I agree that 2000 was (and 2001 would have been!) his most dominant year, I dispute that he was never the same after (because of) his injury. 867822[/snapback] Then you'd be wrong. Cowart was the best linebacker in football before his injury. He was never close to that guy again.
Matt in KC Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 Then you'd be wrong. Cowart was the best linebacker in football before his injury. He was never close to that guy again. 867832[/snapback] Are you sure that was because of the injury? Or maybe it was age, or something in his personal life? Listen, I personally think the injury prevented Cowart from becoming one of the best ever to play the game. I dispute only that TKO won't be worth his salary because he had this same type of injury. I also think Sam Cowart is often referenced as though he was never productive after his injury. Really, he was better his first two years with the Jets stat-wise than he was any full year with the Bills. 2000 was a monster season for him with the Bills, but that's not what we're talking about. He was by far my favorite Bill when he got hurt, and the fact that most NFL fans never learned his name really is a shame.
Bill from NYC Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 Are you sure that was because of the injury? Or maybe it was age, or something in his personal life? Listen, I personally think the injury prevented Cowart from becoming one of the best ever to play the game. I dispute only that TKO won't be worth his salary because he had this same type of injury. I also think Sam Cowart is often referenced as though he was never productive after his injury. Really, he was better his first two years with the Jets stat-wise than he was any full year with the Bills. 2000 was a monster season for him with the Bills, but that's not what we're talking about. He was by far my favorite Bill when he got hurt, and the fact that most NFL fans never learned his name really is a shame. 867844[/snapback] In 2000, Cowart had more sacks than he did in his 3 years with the jests combined, and did so in 12 games. he was getting better each game, or so it seemed. Age had nothing to do with his decline. He was still a kid when he was hurt. His stats look OK with the jests, but he was not a dominant player.
Matt in KC Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 In 2000, Cowart had more sacks than he did in his 3 years with the jests combined, and did so in 12 games. he was getting better each game, or so it seemed. Age had nothing to do with his decline. He was still a kid when he was hurt. His stats look OK with the jests, but he was not a dominant player. 867857[/snapback] I hear you guys and agree for the most part. So, do you think because of his similar injury Takeo will be worth the salary he's scheduled to make next year?
MikeSpeed Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 Sign Nate first! Our run-D sucks so bad that no one in the front seven should be comfortable with their job. Sign Nate first then worry about "luxury" player afterwards.
Bill from NYC Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 I hear you guys and agree for the most part. So, do you think because of his similar injury Takeo will be worth the salary he's scheduled to make next year? 867861[/snapback] A few things must be considered to answer this.... 1) It would probably not result in a big savings to cut him, and the Bills simply do not need the cap space. 2) TKO is starting to improve, and is an extremely hard worker. 3) The man is a leader on this team, not to be taken lightly. 4) I can't stress enough that you are going to see larger and larger salaries in the NFL. Soon, TKO's salary will appear not so large at all. I guess that providing there are no major setbacks, I am FOR giving TKO more time, and see the salary as a non-issue. Jmo.
dave mcbride Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 In 2000, Cowart had more sacks than he did in his 3 years with the jests combined, and did so in 12 games. he was getting better each game, or so it seemed. Age had nothing to do with his decline. He was still a kid when he was hurt. His stats look OK with the jests, but he was not a dominant player. 867857[/snapback] I think in 2002-03 he wasn't nearly as good as he had been, but he really did start out extremely well in 2004. He got hurt again relatively early in the season, unfortunately (knee), and that's pretty much all she wrote.
Matt in KC Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 A few things must be considered to answer this.... 1) It would probably not result in a big savings to cut him, and the Bills simply do not need the cap space. 2) TKO is starting to improve, and is an extremely hard worker. 3) The man is a leader on this team, not to be taken lightly. 4) I can't stress enough that you are going to see larger and larger salaries in the NFL. Soon, TKO's salary will appear not so large at all. I guess that providing there are no major setbacks, I am FOR giving TKO more time, and see the salary as a non-issue. Jmo. 867865[/snapback] That's what I think too, even knowing what happened to Sam Cowart. So, that's why I disagree with: See: Sam Cowart. ... With sorrow in my heart, and my hat in my hands, I apologize, but Takeo Spikes should be cut following this season. Cap room. Youth movement. He has barely played in the past 2 seasons...shall I continue....get him out, and lets start building a winner around here.... 867446[/snapback]
ganesh Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 He was still a good LB once he recovered from the injury, but he was a friggin' GREAT one before it. 867804[/snapback] May Sam tried to come back from the injury too soon.
Lori Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 May Sam tried to come back from the injury too soon. 867899[/snapback] Like Culpepper's knee? I've heard it takes up to 18 months to come back from an Achilles injury, so I'm in no hurry to send TKO packing. And I honestly think TD would've re-signed Cowart, but wasn't willing to fork over huge $$$ for a guy we didn't know for sure would be able to play again. Julian Peterson didn't do much his first season back from a ruptured Achilles, but he's got nine sacks for SEA this year. Trouble with Cowart was, he seemed more susceptible to leg injuries ever since the ACL in college. I hope that's not going to be the case with Spikes, but I'm more than willing to take that risk for a chance at getting an All-Pro LB back. (As long as it's Ralph's money, of course... )
bills_fan Posted December 15, 2006 Author Posted December 15, 2006 A few things must be considered to answer this.... 1) It would probably not result in a big savings to cut him, and the Bills simply do not need the cap space. 2) TKO is starting to improve, and is an extremely hard worker. 3) The man is a leader on this team, not to be taken lightly. 4) I can't stress enough that you are going to see larger and larger salaries in the NFL. Soon, TKO's salary will appear not so large at all. I guess that providing there are no major setbacks, I am FOR giving TKO more time, and see the salary as a non-issue. Jmo. 867865[/snapback] Stop making so much sense!!
Realist Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 A few things must be considered to answer this.... 1) It would probably not result in a big savings to cut him, and the Bills simply do not need the cap space. 2) TKO is starting to improve, and is an extremely hard worker. 3) The man is a leader on this team, not to be taken lightly. 4) I can't stress enough that you are going to see larger and larger salaries in the NFL. Soon, TKO's salary will appear not so large at all. I guess that providing there are no major setbacks, I am FOR giving TKO more time, and see the salary as a non-issue. Jmo. 867865[/snapback] Hey, for once I agree with Bill! It's way too early to think about dumping TKO and Bill has nailed all the reasons. This defense is going to need leaders and it is going to start with TKO next year.
jarthur31 Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 No offense to Fletcher-Baker but Nate should be priority #1. 866970[/snapback] I agree. As it stands now, he is the only playmaking corner we have on the roster.
Recommended Posts