Stiffler Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Willis would have had a great 2007 season: JPLosman is more comfortable, the OL is stronger, and, of course, Willis wants the big pay-day (and yes, for a guy like Willis and his pal, Drew Rosenhaus, this is a big big motivator). Apparently Marv thought that the trade discussions could proceed with complete secrecy, hence the "Bills officials annoyed" reports. This is just more proof of Marv's inexperience. I agree that this will not sit well with McGahee. He has a record of being unhappy about his contract and Buffalo. So now, instead of having a good offense led by a motivated, talented RB that knows the offense, we'll either have: a disgruntled McGahee that could potentially be a team cancer all year if Marv doesn't trade him or an extra mid-round draft pick; and Bills are forced to use an early draft pick on an unproven RB Do we get nothing for him after 2007? That's right. But is a 4th-round pick worth all the negatives? No. Oh, (and just to stoke the fires even more), Marv's other two huge mistakes: Agreeing last season NOT to franchise Clements for 2007, avoiding a preseason holdout. What did we get? A full team all pre-season. What did we lose? A top-flight CB for all of 2007. Inexcusable. The draft: should have traded down and landed Whitner later, picking up extra first-day picks; should NOT have traded up and gotten McCargo (the third best D-lineman on his COLLEGE team). Inexcusable in any draft, but worse in a deep draft. Marv Levy, HoF coach, has once again proved his inexperience at being a GM.
firstngoal Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Willis would have had a great 2007 season: JPLosman is more comfortable, the OL is stronger, and, of course, Willis wants the big pay-day (and yes, for a guy like Willis and his pal, Drew Rosenhaus, this is a big big motivator). Apparently Marv thought that the trade discussions could proceed with complete secrecy, hence the "Bills officials annoyed" reports. This is just more proof of Marv's inexperience. I agree that this will not sit well with McGahee. He has a record of being unhappy about his contract and Buffalo. So now, instead of having a good offense led by a motivated, talented RB that knows the offense, we'll either have: a disgruntled McGahee that could potentially be a team cancer all year if Marv doesn't trade him or an extra mid-round draft pick; and Bills are forced to use an early draft pick on an unproven RB Do we get nothing for him after 2007? That's right. But is a 4th-round pick worth all the negatives? No. Oh, (and just to stoke the fires even more), Marv's other two huge mistakes: Agreeing last season NOT to franchise Clements for 2007, avoiding a preseason holdout. What did we get? A full team all pre-season. What did we lose? A top-flight CB for all of 2007. Inexcusable. The draft: should have traded down and landed Whitner later, picking up extra first-day picks; should NOT have traded up and gotten McCargo (the third best D-lineman on his COLLEGE team). Inexcusable in any draft, but worse in a deep draft. Marv Levy, HoF coach, has once again proved his inexperience at being a GM. I've been critical of Marv in the past and I've posted several threads about how I feel the team will take a step back this season, but I do think that trading Willis is the thing to do while you can get something for him which they should have done with Clements last season. I'll take a 4th round pick (hopefully a high 4th) for him and move on. There are plenty of good players still available in the 4th round. If they do trade Willis, my guess is they will be targeting PSU Hb Tony Hunt in the second round IF he is still available when we pick.
IDBillzFan Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Willis would have had a great 2007 season: JPLosman is more comfortable, the OL is stronger, and, of course, Willis wants the big pay-day (and yes, for a guy like Willis and his pal, Drew Rosenhaus, this is a big big motivator). Apparently Marv thought that the trade discussions could proceed with complete secrecy, hence the "Bills officials annoyed" reports. This is just more proof of Marv's inexperience. I agree that this will not sit well with McGahee. He has a record of being unhappy about his contract and Buffalo. So now, instead of having a good offense led by a motivated, talented RB that knows the offense, we'll either have: a disgruntled McGahee that could potentially be a team cancer all year if Marv doesn't trade him or an extra mid-round draft pick; and Bills are forced to use an early draft pick on an unproven RB Do we get nothing for him after 2007? That's right. But is a 4th-round pick worth all the negatives? No. Oh, (and just to stoke the fires even more), Marv's other two huge mistakes: Agreeing last season NOT to franchise Clements for 2007, avoiding a preseason holdout. What did we get? A full team all pre-season. What did we lose? A top-flight CB for all of 2007. Inexcusable. The draft: should have traded down and landed Whitner later, picking up extra first-day picks; should NOT have traded up and gotten McCargo (the third best D-lineman on his COLLEGE team). Inexcusable in any draft, but worse in a deep draft. Marv Levy, HoF coach, has once again proved his inexperience at being a GM. So let me get this right: McGahee goes out of his way to let people know he's not happy with his current situation, and that's okay. But the Bills let it be known among a group of peers who are supposed to keep their freakin' traps shut that they're not happy with his current situation, and that is considered one of three huge mistakes by Marv Levy. It's as laughable as the other two mistakes you mention. I don't know if anyone is standing around counting all of your mistakes, but if someone decides to take up the hobby, they could start with this thread. The Giants screwed up. Not Marv. Of course, if only Marv had more GM experience, he probably would have said something to Reese like "Oh, and this McGahee talk is between us girls, okay?" Plus, he would magically know what you apparently magically know: that McGahee will have a great 2007, that Whitner would still be available if traded down, and Clements would have gladly shown up to camp to get things started off the right foot with the new staff and management. Geezus. I don't know why you're the only one who sees all the obvious stuff.
Stiffler Posted February 25, 2007 Author Posted February 25, 2007 Great post. Some over-the-top sarcasm for my taste. But still well done. But to your points: Leaks in the NFL are common if not to be expected. Even if Reese kept his "trap" shut, Marv should not have even been discussing a trade. For a mid-round pick? No. I do not claim to know the future. Like anyone, one can only predict based on past results. As such, McGahee has always wanted a big, long-term contract as has his pal/agent Drew Rosenhaus. The surest way to ensure that is to play his butt off this year. Regarding last year's draft: Would Whitner have been there if we traded down? Likely. For sure? No. Would they have gotten a comparable player AND extra day-one draft picks? Yes. Is that WELL worth it in that draft with Pro-Bowlers coming in the 2nd, 3rd rounds? Absolutely. With Clements last year-- there have not been many franchised players that held out the whole year. Have there been any? Any hobbyist listing my mistakes would be very, very busy
mead107 Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 marv is doing well . I have no problems with the way he is running the show .
YOOOOOO Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 what were his first and second bungling mistakes again??
Nanker Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Somebody get Ralph on the phone NOW! He's got to fire Marv and hire this guy fast. We'll be SuperBowl bound within 4 months.
BADOLBILZ Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Willis would have had a great 2007 season: JPLosman is more comfortable, the OL is stronger, and, of course, Willis wants the big pay-day (and yes, for a guy like Willis and his pal, Drew Rosenhaus, this is a big big motivator). Apparently Marv thought that the trade discussions could proceed with complete secrecy, hence the "Bills officials annoyed" reports. This is just more proof of Marv's inexperience. I agree that this will not sit well with McGahee. He has a record of being unhappy about his contract and Buffalo. So now, instead of having a good offense led by a motivated, talented RB that knows the offense, we'll either have: a disgruntled McGahee that could potentially be a team cancer all year if Marv doesn't trade him or an extra mid-round draft pick; and Bills are forced to use an early draft pick on an unproven RB Do we get nothing for him after 2007? That's right. But is a 4th-round pick worth all the negatives? No. Oh, (and just to stoke the fires even more), Marv's other two huge mistakes: Agreeing last season NOT to franchise Clements for 2007, avoiding a preseason holdout. What did we get? A full team all pre-season. What did we lose? A top-flight CB for all of 2007. Inexcusable. The draft: should have traded down and landed Whitner later, picking up extra first-day picks; should NOT have traded up and gotten McCargo (the third best D-lineman on his COLLEGE team). Inexcusable in any draft, but worse in a deep draft. Marv Levy, HoF coach, has once again proved his inexperience at being a GM. It was one thing to allow the defense to be gutted, but now to weaken the running game too? I mean, you still need players. This situation is very reminiscent of the Donahoe "kool aid" era, where he could do no wrong in many fans eyes despite obviously being on a very dubious path. We are looking at the Bills losing two core young players in their mid-20's, and possibly getting NOTHING in exchange. Where does this happen in the NFL? Having McGahee and Clements may not be the key to this team winning next year, but the fact remains that each team has only so many chips to use to get what they want. Those chips are cap space and draft picks. Here this team sits....with cuts and trades forthcoming.....probably $45M under the cap. The "second tier" free agents they coveted last offseason are now actually "first tier" in this market because almost every GOOD(read:not out of football, too old or a reserve elsewhere) free agent-to-be has either been tagged or re-signed. This team had AT LEAST 4 significant holes to fill at the end of the season(2 good guards, a top notchDT and a receiving threat to complement Evans), and now they head into free agency needing to find 7 or 8 STARTERS. That's crazy. The Raiders aren't looking for 7 or 8 starters. At one point, we could HOPE that young talent from within could fill the DT, CB and MLB spots.....but it's becoming increasingly likely that this team is going to go into camp with a whole lot of unknowns and relying heavily on draft picks or overpriced, previously underperforming free agents from other teams.
mead107 Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Willis dances way to much, not the best blocker and no knows what is going to happen next year with some new stud that we draft or trade for . http://www.schucktales.com/images/multimedia/shout.mp3
BADOLBILZ Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 I've been critical of Marv in the past and I've posted several threads about how I feel the team will take a step back this season, but I do think that trading Willis is the thing to do while you can get something for him which they should have done with Clements last season. I'll take a 4th round pick (hopefully a high 4th) for him and move on. There are plenty of good players still available in the 4th round. If they do trade Willis, my guess is they will be targeting PSU Hb Tony Hunt in the second round IF he is still available when we pick. Have to disagree. I knew McGahee was a douchebag when most everyone was still fawning over his celebrity and the attention it brought to Buffalo. But Willis is entering the key season of his career and when Willis is TRULY up against it, he has the ability to dig deep. See his rehab from the knee injury. We were almost assured of not seeing the reccurrance of the things that keep him from being an elite power RB. Those guys are a relatively rare commodity in the NFL right now. This guy was poised for a 350 carry, 1500+ yard 15 TD season. A season that could have been a bridge for JP Losman and a young OL to go from being decent to outstanding. With this team at such a critical point in it's development, even a second round pick isn't worth what's at stake. A fourth round pick would be just plain absurd. As a GM, if you are going to make a promise not to franchise a player, do it with a RB. RB's are less expensive and easier to replace, and keeping McGahee would allow the team to take a chance on a later round RB instead of blowing an early pick that could be used elsewhere. No comparison to the Clements situation, RB's do not have the trade value that a shut down corner has and last years team was not going anywhere that it needed Clements in mini-camps that badly. They outright squandered at least a first round pick in the Clements situation. Even after a great year, McGahee wouldn't command franchise type compensation. See Shaun Alexander last year.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 the second i see someone say Marv shouldve traded down last draft, i stop reading/listening. that person is obviously too busy looking at all these arbitrary "value charts" that the draft "experts" come up with since they really have no clue when it comes down to it. ill take a sure thing at 8 and get a 16 game starter and shore up our D-backfield for what looks like 10 more years, rather than trade down, lose that guy and end up with an extra Tim Anderson in the 3rd. drop this criticism already. it makes you guys look trite and stupid. Marv reached (so say the "experts") and it worked out well. if anything i commend him for seeing the talent there.
billrooter Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Willis would have had,what makes you think it's a sure thing he's gone? I hope he's gone knowing the type of impact he could have (contract year) but why does it take contract year to entice these guys to play better, why can't they be that motivated to be the best unless it's about the money? Mcgahee if i i know anything about it will have his best year this year in atleast the last three, which isn't saying alot, but i hope marv finds his replacement and his ass is gone!
mary owen Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 yeah, the old codger really effed up this time. 3 strikes. Doesn't he see the that this running back fits everything Marv likes in a back? marginal speed questional blitz pick up when he hits the hole, his burst is unstoppable (3 baby momma's and counting??) a guy who will only be motivated by a big payday also, what makes everyone think Willis is "proven" in his 4 years? I should be excited about his potential for 07??? also, last I checked, he's still on the roster. Marv is running this team into the ground...
Stiffler Posted February 25, 2007 Author Posted February 25, 2007 the second i see someone say Marv shouldve traded down last draft, i stop reading/listening. that person is obviously too busy looking at all these arbitrary "value charts" that the draft "experts" come up with since they really have no clue when it comes down to it. ill take a sure thing at 8 and get a 16 game starter and shore up our D-backfield for what looks like 10 more years, rather than trade down, lose that guy and end up with an extra Tim Anderson in the 3rd. drop this criticism already. it makes you guys look trite and stupid. Marv reached (so say the "experts") and it worked out well. if anything i commend him for seeing the talent there. Man, it's a good thing Dickens didn't go with his first copy: "It was the best of times. It was the worst of times. Marv should have traded down." The world would have missed a good book. Not sure what you were watching last year, but Donte Whitner didn't look anything like a "sure thing." I didn't see one game-breaking play, nor evidence that he was a game-changer a la Polamalu, Bob Sanders, Ed Reed, Roy Williams (who all showed such ability in their rookie year). I did see him, however, get burned often and look very mediocre. It was a bad decision. The 2006 draft was loaded.
mary owen Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Man, it's a good thing Dickens didn't go with his first copy: "It was the best of times. It was the worst of times. Marv should have traded down." The world would have missed a good book. Not sure what you were watching last year, but Donte Whitner didn't look anything like a "sure thing." I didn't see one game-breaking play, nor evidence that he was a game-changer a la Polamalu, Bob Sanders, Ed Reed, Roy Williams (who all showed such ability in their rookie year). I did see him, however, get burned often and look very mediocre. It was a bad decision. The 2006 draft was loaded. one year, one chance. the guy's a bust. man, you are a riot.
Stiffler Posted February 25, 2007 Author Posted February 25, 2007 why does it take contract year to entice these guys to play better, why can't they be that motivated to be the best unless it's about the money? Mcgahee if i i know anything about it will have his best year this year in atleast the last three, which isn't saying alot, but i hope marv finds his replacement and his ass is gone! Money is a motivator. More for some players than others. McGahee is one for which it is. Look at his history after his knee surgery: the motivation was incredible to stay a 1st-round pick and get paid. Now it's contract time again. He and Rosenhaus have been waiting for this for a long time.
BillnutinHouston Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Not sure what you were watching last year, but Donte Whitner didn't look anything like a "sure thing." I didn't see one game-breaking play, nor evidence that he was a game-changer a la Polamalu, Bob Sanders, Ed Reed, Roy Williams (who all showed such ability in their rookie year). I did see him, however, get burned often and look very mediocre. It was a bad decision. The 2006 draft was loaded. EXXXXXACTLY. Why is it so hard for people to imagine that a first year GM would make mistakes? Just because it's Marv? Why is it hall of fame coaches aren't streaming into the GM ranks? Because it's a totally different job, that's why. Only Ralph in his closed-minded thinking would bring in a guy he trusted, even though he has never been an NFL GM. It's one thing to lack GM savvy, it's quite another to be totally unprepared a year into the job. Levy stated the other day that he didn't know what the cap was, and didn't know what Willis had said in his interview even though his focus is on "personnel". Yikes.
BADOLBILZ Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Willis would have had,what makes you think it's a sure thing he's gone? I hope he's gone knowing the type of impact he could have (contract year) but why does it take contract year to entice these guys to play better, why can't they be that motivated to be the best unless it's about the money? Mcgahee if i i know anything about it will have his best year this year in atleast the last three, which isn't saying alot, but i hope marv finds his replacement and his ass is gone! And how did you feel about McGahee a year ago? Did you want "his ass gone!"? It never ceases to amaze me the people who line up here to criticize posters who question the GM or players, only to turn on them with a vengeance when it goes all wrong. The truth is it's NEVER as good or as bad as it seems. Holdouts, angst and uncertainty have been the order of the day in the NFL for decades and that is not what costs teams victories. It doesn't tear apart the lockerroom when a star player has to "settle" for the franchise tag or has to play out his contract. When it comes to money, it's every man for himself. What matters in the lockerroom once camp starts is the quality of coaching, proper utilization of players and working conditions. Win and make your players look good doing it and you can be total pricks at contract time, just like the Patriots.
Stiffler Posted February 25, 2007 Author Posted February 25, 2007 one year, one chance. the guy's a bust. man, you are a riot. I never said he was a bust. Not at all. I am simply saying that taking him at #8 and passing on more Day1 draft picks was the wrong decision. As far as his play goes, I hope he improves. But many other touted safeties came in the league and excelled right away. Donte is not one of them.
BADOLBILZ Posted February 25, 2007 Posted February 25, 2007 Man, it's a good thing Dickens didn't go with his first copy: "It was the best of times. It was the worst of times. Marv should have traded down." The world would have missed a good book. Not sure what you were watching last year, but Donte Whitner didn't look anything like a "sure thing." I didn't see one game-breaking play, nor evidence that he was a game-changer a la Polamalu, Bob Sanders, Ed Reed, Roy Williams (who all showed such ability in their rookie year). I did see him, however, get burned often and look very mediocre. It was a bad decision. The 2006 draft was loaded. People here often forget how loaded that 2006 draft was. Whitner was an unnecessarily "safe" pick in a draft where there was such an abundance of high impact players. It may work out, but as you said Whitner was not special. He was as advertised: smart, prepared and tough. But he was also a small SAFETY. Not a lineman, not a corner player or even a skill player. Safety is perhaps the easiest regular position to fill and using that #8 overall on him was a pretty big chip. His opposite number was a 4th round pick, who played as well as Whitner. Whitner was abused in coverage against Antonio Gates, and you would hope a player selected that high could at least hold his own against a top TE. He may never be effective against TE's, which will hurt in this defense. He also did not start 16 games. He missed a game and time at various other points with injury. Just pointing that out for Dr. Frankenstein.
Recommended Posts