ENOUGH ALREADY

[The Big Cat]

This been a highly debated topic for a couple weeks now. I myself have voiced my opinion but have remained receptive to other posters' perspective. Running back, IMO, is not one of the areas the Bills will be concerned with going into the offseason and I think the strategies for free agency and the draft revolve around the return or the departure of Nate Clements. Regardless of what happens at CB, by April 2007, Willis McGahee WILL STILL BE A BUFFALO BILL. He will not, however, be offered an extension this spring or summer.

 

If Buffalo re-signs Nate, don't be surprised if they use a second or third round draft pick on a running back. Let Willis play for his money going into his contract year, and make him do it with a young back nipping at his heels. This will be the case even if they can't sign Nate but the rookie RB will come from rounds 3 or 4.

 

NFL teams around the league are implementing the bicameral running game and Buffalo would thrive in such a system, especially if the number 2 provides Willis with ample motivation. Both our coah and our GM have hardons for a run heavy offense and Bills fans should expect to see upgrades to the offensive line as well.

 

But to get rid of Willis this year is a bit silly. The only motivation for doing so would be to bring in new, moldable blood (this would ONLY happen though if Nate is re-signed)-but as of now, RB is not an immediate need and can EASILY be upgraded in the draft or free agency. So easily, in fact, and so effectively, that whether or not Nate is wearing a Bills jersey in 2007, having McGahee on the roster allows for Buffalo to address more pressing needs while still enhancing the running game.

[DrDawkinstein]

what do we do with him next year then? if he has a really good season, we probably wont be able to sign him. so do we let him just walk? and not get anything for him?

 

im with you on NOT extending him and making him run for his money this year. but i just dont know what we'd do after the season, even if we had a suitable replacement.

[The Big Cat]

what do we do with him next year then? if he has a really good season, we probably wont be able to sign him. so do we let him just walk? and not get anything for him?

 

im with you on NOT extending him and making him run for his money this year. but i just dont know what we'd do after the season, even if we had a suitable replacement.

 

IMO he's replacable by two young backs. I think Buffalo drafts another RB in 2008 and the tandem will make us all forget about Baby Daddy.

 

Hypothetical: Willis and 2007 draft pick combine for 1675 yards. 2007 pick and 2008 pick combine for 1950.

[billsevans]

What about resigning A-Train and then picking a rookie. What about Tony Hunt with a second or third roung pick. Lynch is overrated.

[The Big Cat]

What about resigning A-Train and then picking a rookie. What about Tony Hunt with a second or third roung pick. Lynch is overrated.

 

I've been A-Train advocate since the first game of the year when he had that 18 yard TD run against NE. But I don't think he can hold a candle to a motivated McGahee. And I think McGahee knows it which is why he did just about enough to retain the number one spot.

 

I don't know a damn thing about College Football and about prospects at any position. But I think that anyone who can push Willis harder than the A-Train would result in more running production.

[billsevans]

I agree with your theory of getting a rb this year and next year. Look at next years running back class, you have Mike Hart of Michigan, Antonio Pittman of Ohio St., Darren McFadden of Arkansas, Ray Rice from Rutgers, and Coker Jr. from Tennessee. We all know what happened after we picked a unning back from Tennessee (Travis).

[Ramius]

what do we do with him next year then? if he has a really good season, we probably wont be able to sign him. so do we let him just walk? and not get anything for him?

 

im with you on NOT extending him and making him run for his money this year. but i just dont know what we'd do after the season, even if we had a suitable replacement.

 

If willis blows up next year for something like 1500-12, then slap the franchise tag on him. He'll either 1) sign the tag, and play 1 more year, which he'll still be motivated, or 2) we'll deal him for a draft pick.

[The Big Cat]

If willis blows up next year for something like 1500-12, then slap the franchise tag on him. He'll either 1) sign the tag, and play 1 more year, which he'll still be motivated, or 2) we'll deal him for a draft pick.

 

Basically what it comes down to is Willis is a streaky but proven commodity. And at this point in time, all the chips are on Buffalo's side of the table. Hard, really, to complain about the RB situation and Buffalo's potential to foster a dominante running game, even with so many other question marks plauging the roster.

 

Towards the end of the season I really got down on Willis for his 2006 performance. But I've come around: no other back dealt with the injuries he did and no other run offense faced as many horrific defenses. Barring injuries, the running stats in 2007 can only increase from 2006!

[jester43]

i'm not a big willis fan either, but i think it's obvious that unless someone offers up a top-50 pick for him, we keep him next year. i'm sure he'll rush for 1500 yards in his contract year, and we'll finally get some reasonable production out of him before we let him walk.

 

then he can take his big contract from washington or miami or whomever, and go back to sleep for couple seasons.

[DrDawkinstein]

the bad thing about slapping the tag on him is that if we cant trade him, we have to give him the money of a top 3 back. im guessing thats a HUGE cap hit.

 

as far as drafting goes, id much rather grab Hunt in the 2nd (and definitely in the 3rd if he's there) than Lynch in the 1st.

 

if we can grab a RB this year and have a-train signed, i would have no problem just letting Willis walk after next year and drafting another RB then as well.

[Ramius]

the bad thing about slapping the tag on him is that if we cant trade him, we have to give him the money of a top 3 back. im guessing thats a HUGE cap hit.

 

as far as drafting goes, id much rather grab Hunt in the 2nd (and definitely in the 3rd if he's there) than Lynch in the 1st.

 

if we can grab a RB this year and have a-train signed, i would have no problem just letting Willis walk after next year and drafting another RB then as well.

 

Its the average of the top 5 RB's. As of 2005, the franchise tag for a RB was 6.32 million. So now, figure that its probably in the 7.5 million range (just an educated guess). Seeing as the Bills probably wont spend completely up to the cap, you could use willis for another year, even if he is over priced.

 

IMO, its worth it to keep a motivated willis at a big higher price tag than it is to let him go for nothing.

[DrDawkinstein]

Its the average of the top 5 RB's. As of 2005, the franchise tag for a RB was 6.32 million. So now, figure that its probably in the 7.5 million range (just an educated guess). Seeing as the Bills probably wont spend completely up to the cap, you could use willis for another year, even if he is over priced.

 

IMO, its worth it to keep a motivated willis at a big higher price tag than it is to let him go for nothing.

 

even if we have 2 or even 3 other RBs who are ready to pond the rock?

[GDTRFB]

I'm very curious what Willis' asking price is going to be.

 

I'm sure it will be something absurd like what Edgerrin James got but I feel Willis is more comparable to Ahman Green, who is a free agent this year. Wait and see what Green receives and offer an identical deal---take it or leave it.

[keepthefaith]

This been a highly debated topic for a couple weeks now. I myself have voiced my opinion but have remained receptive to other posters' perspective. Running back, IMO, is not one of the areas the Bills will be concerned with going into the offseason and I think the strategies for free agency and the draft revolve around the return or the departure of Nate Clements. Regardless of what happens at CB, by April 2007, Willis McGahee WILL STILL BE A BUFFALO BILL. He will not, however, be offered an extension this spring or summer.

 

If Buffalo re-signs Nate, don't be surprised if they use a second or third round draft pick on a running back. Let Willis play for his money going into his contract year, and make him do it with a young back nipping at his heels. This will be the case even if they can't sign Nate but the rookie RB will come from rounds 3 or 4.

 

NFL teams around the league are implementing the bicameral running game and Buffalo would thrive in such a system, especially if the number 2 provides Willis with ample motivation. Both our coah and our GM have hardons for a run heavy offense and Bills fans should expect to see upgrades to the offensive line as well.

 

But to get rid of Willis this year is a bit silly. The only motivation for doing so would be to bring in new, moldable blood (this would ONLY happen though if Nate is re-signed)-but as of now, RB is not an immediate need and can EASILY be upgraded in the draft or free agency. So easily, in fact, and so effectively, that whether or not Nate is wearing a Bills jersey in 2007, having McGahee on the roster allows for Buffalo to address more pressing needs while still enhancing the running game.

 

I'm not impressed by Willis thus far on or off the field but I do believe he has the physical talent to be very good. The heart and the mind I am not too sure about. However, young immature players like Willis often grow up during their NFL careers so maybe the lightbulb can still be illuminated for Willis. If I'm Marv, I'd approach a contract extension as follows.

 

Write a new deal that extends him a few years. Instead of front loading the money, put in a big roster bonus each year. That way he's playing for a contract each year. If the guy gets his head on straight and consistently performs, he stays a Bill and gets paid very well. If not he can be cut or traded without salary cap baggage and he becomes an UFA. The player and agent won't like it, but it's fair to both sides.

 

I remember when Jerome Bettis was run out of St. Louis. His behavior and effort early in his career was poor. Over time he really became a class act on and off the field. Had a pretty good career in Pittsburgh. Would hate to see Willis run out of town only to right the ship shortly thereafter. I'm not sure he has it in him, but if he's motivated the right way and get's some mentoring he might surprise all of us. If I were him I'd start by getting a new agent. One that coaches his clients better on the "taking the high road".

[MikeSpeed]

I get the opinion that some think WM has Randy Moss syndrome. (Plays when he feels like it)

I wouldn't go so far as to say that.

I just think he isn't all that great.

My fear is if WM holds out this year.

Can this young team afford that kind of distraction?

Keep him, trade him, I really don't care.

But if he holds outs, and disrupts training camp, then C-Ya Willis.

[Pyrite Gal]

I get the opinion that some think WM has Randy Moss syndrome. (Plays when he feels like it)

I wouldn't go so far as to say that.

I just think he isn't all that great.

My fear is if WM holds out this year.

Can this young team afford that kind of distraction?

Keep him, trade him, I really don't care.

But if he holds outs, and disrupts training camp, then C-Ya Willis.

 

Certainly if he holds out then we deal with it and I hope the Bills get another alternative this year to develop and provide competition, However, HE APPEARS NOWHERE NEAR HOLDING OUT AS:

 

1. Most fans hate Rosenhaus and he clearly is a bigtime mouth (actually that is hie job) and likely a legend in his own mind. However, from what I understand there is little or no history of his clients holding out (probably to some extent because the local media and some fans act like such scared rabbits that some dramatic move needs to be made because folks are afraid he will hold out). The holdout concerns and fears seem mostly to be without any evidence and really are based on what folks "think" will happen even there is no evidence to indicate it will.

 

2. One of the main reasons a holdout makes no real sense for WM is that he clearly has no leverage to do this. If he was coming off a great season or even had reached the arbitrary milestone of 1000 yards he might have some leverage, but given his sporadic production (whether its the OL, the lack of a serious consistent Bills offense, or him simply being unmotivated) production is what counts and he has not done this beyond showing potential if we get our act together offensively. In fact, I think a hold out would actually damage him a ton fiscally as he would draw a bunch of scrutiny to his real world production and add a reputation as a bad employee to his resume. He simply has little leverage to holdout.

 

3. Under his current contract and the CBA the Bills hold all the leverage right now and even when he becomes an FA he only gets more leverage if he produces next year and if in fact he does produce like the elite top 5 back he claims to be and wants to be paid like, the ability of the Bills to tag him if they choose and pay him the salary average of the top 5 RBs still gives the Bills the leverage to choose their own fate.

 

Simply staying the course seems by far to be the most intelligent fiscal and football move for the Bills in 07 unless something else like him launching a hold out though it hurts his own financial interests were to occur.

 

Having a bunch of baby mommas (as he refers to them) or having his Bills business advice interpreted and promoted by WGR to encourage a fight and higher listernership for them does not count at all for being something happening that changes the fiscal equation much at all.

[The Big Cat]

I'm not impressed by Willis thus far on or off the field but I do believe he has the physical talent to be very good. The heart and the mind I am not too sure about. However, young immature players like Willis often grow up during their NFL careers so maybe the lightbulb can still be illuminated for Willis. If I'm Marv, I'd approach a contract extension as follows.

 

Write a new deal that extends him a few years. Instead of front loading the money, put in a big roster bonus each year. That way he's playing for a contract each year. If the guy gets his head on straight and consistently performs, he stays a Bill and gets paid very well. If not he can be cut or traded without salary cap baggage and he becomes an UFA. The player and agent won't like it, but it's fair to both sides.

 

I remember when Jerome Bettis was run out of St. Louis. His behavior and effort early in his career was poor. Over time he really became a class act on and off the field. Had a pretty good career in Pittsburgh. Would hate to see Willis run out of town only to right the ship shortly thereafter. I'm not sure he has it in him, but if he's motivated the right way and get's some mentoring he might surprise all of us. If I were him I'd start by getting a new agent. One that coaches his clients better on the "taking the high road".

 

What about extending him an incentive heavy contract? A la Ricky Williams?