todd Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 If you're going to say "we shall see", talk the talk yourself. You seem to have an opinion formed, although it isn't supported by facts. Here's a few facts for you. If you call this badmouthing, so be it: 1. Willis didn't have a 4.0 YPC average. 2. Willis didn't rush for 1000 yards. 3. Willis didn't know the playbook. 4. Willis threatened to hold out - according to marv. 5. Willis forgot it was 4th down. He thought it was 3rd, costing buffalo the game. Given these facts, how the hell can you say willis was too valuable to trade? How the hell can you say he's worth the top-5 RB money he got. You might want to support your point before you argue it more. "We shall see" is a smug and stupid argument. Try to do better. We shall see just how "average" he is with the Ravens. You may want to compare what McGahee got to what the Bills are paying Dockery. As for the allegation that he did not know the playbook, I think that it is a bit sad that there appears to be a campaign to bad mouth him in the press to attempt to justify this deal -- which equates to essentially the same compensation as what the Bears got for Thomas Jones based on the NFL draft value chart. We shall see what happens.
Peter Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 If you're going to say "we shall see", talk the talk yourself. You seem to have an opinion formed, although it isn't supported by facts. Here's a few facts for you. If you call this badmouthing, so be it: 1. Willis didn't have a 4.0 YPC average. 2. Willis didn't rush for 1000 yards. 3. Willis didn't know the playbook. 4. Willis threatened to hold out - according to marv. 5. Willis forgot it was 4th down. He thought it was 3rd, costing buffalo the game. Given these facts, how the hell can you say willis was too valuable to trade? How the hell can you say he's worth the top-5 RB money he got. You might want to support your point before you argue it more. "We shall see" is a smug and stupid argument. Try to do better. I said "we shall see" not to be smug but as in time will tell. You are being too sensitive. We obviously have a different view of WM. I do not expect you to agree with me. So be it. But taking your comments in order. 1. WM averaged 3.9 yards per carry for the Bills in his careeer behind one of the worst offensive lines in football. Why do you think that the Bills are trying to upgrade it now. You may want to compare E. James average this past year versus the year before with the Colts. As I recall it, it dropped something like .8 yards per carry. That illustrates the importance of having an offensive line -- even if you are acknowledged (as Edge) as one of the better RBs in the NFL. 2. See No. 1. He also missed two full games and part of one with an injury to three ribs. Even still, he came a few yards short of 1,000. Ironically, he came up short in the last game against the Ravens -- the team that traded for him and just signed him to a new contract. You may recall that the Ravens' defense had only 3 defensive backs on many plays and had 8 or 9 in the box specifically to defend against WM. What does that tell you about which offensive player they respected the most? It was the same most of the year with opposing defenses crowding the box to defend against WM. 3. Threatened hold out? Rosenhaus approached the Bills about an extension and WM ended up signing a very reasonable deal with the Ravens -- especially when you compare it to what the Bills are paying Dockery. 4. We can disagree about what down he thought it was, but you may want to review that play again. It was obvious that he knew where he needed to go and tried to get there. Fowler got beat like a drum by Wilfork and knocked him two yards back in the backfield completely disrupting the play. Our offensive line specialized in allowing opposing teams' defenses to get into our backfield. With any luck, this year will be different. Time will tell which one of us is correct about this situation.
todd Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Love the willis excuses, but I like facts better. 1. Levy is on record - on the radio - saying that rosencrap "reminded" him that willis could hold out. That, in sales speak, is a threat. That's crap, buddy. It is classless crap. 2. The ravens paid willis like a top-5 back. You have yet to argue that willis is a top 5 back. He's not by any measure. A Top-5 back should carry his team. Willis NEVER did that. A top-5 back should make the Pro bowl. Willis isn't even in the same category as a pro-bowl back by any measure. 3. "We shall see" is not a valid point. Facts are that Willis is an average back - by any measure. 4. I'm not being sensitive. I just had the smarts not to buy a Willis jersey. 5. Dockery is an OFFENSIVE LINEMAN. Willis is a RUNNING BACK. It's great in theory to compare contracts between positions, but in actuality it is stupid. Not only that - you complain that willis ran behind a bad O-line, but suggest that dockery's contract wasn't worth it? Oh, the irony! 6.Willis did NOT sign a reasonable contract. His contract is for WAY MORE than willis is worth. As an average back - and willis is AVERAGE - he should be paid somewhere just north of the vet minimum. That is what I would call reasonable for an average back. I've yet to see a compelling argument giving evidence supported by facts that willis is anything more than average. 7. Willis played injured. That's great. That's an expectation for the "best back in the nfl", not a superhuman feat. I would expect any great back to play hurt. 8. Willis didn't rush for 1000 yards, the measuring stick for an average back. He hardly cracked the 100 mark at all during games. He very rarely got yards on his own. Thus, he's an average back. I said "we shall see" not to be smug but as in time will tell. You are being too sensitive. We obviously have a different view of WM. I do not expect you to agree with me. So be it. But taking your comments in order. 1. WM averaged 3.9 yards per carry for the Bills in his careeer behind one of the worst offensive lines in football. Why do you think that the Bills are trying to upgrade it now. You may want to compare E. James average this past year versus the year before with the Colts. As I recall it, it dropped something like .8 yards per carry. That illustrates the importance of having an offensive line -- even if you are acknowledges (as Edge) as one of the better RBs in the NFL. 2. See No. 1. He also missed two full games and part of one with an injury to three ribs. Even still, he came a few yards short of 1,000. Ironically, he came up short in the last game against the Ravens -- the team that traded for him and just signed him to a new contract. You may recall that the Ravens' defense had only 3 defensive backs on many plays and had 8 or 9 in the box specifically to defend against WM. What does that tell you about which offensive player they respected the most? It was the same most of the year with opposing defenses crowding the box to defend against WM. 3. Threatened hold out? Rosenhaus approached the Bills about an extension and WM ended up signing a very reasonable deal with the Ravens -- especially when you compare it to what the Bills are paying Dockery. 4. We can disagree about what down he thought it was, but you may want to review that play again. It was obvious that he knew where he needed to go and tried to get there. Fowler got beat like a drum by Wilfork and knocked him two yards back in the backfield completely disrupting the play. Our offensive line specialized in allowing opposing teams' defenses to get into our backfield. With any luck, this year will be different. Time will tell which one of us is correct about this situation.
Peter Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 As I said, I know that you were not going to agree with me, and I certainly do not agree with you. At the risk of infuriating you (which is a risk I will just have to take), we will see which one of us is correct after the 2007 season.
ganesh Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 It took McGahee less than a day to sign a new contract that is quite reasonable by NFL standards (just look at what the Bills are paying Dockery). The Bills could have signed him just as fast if they wanted him. It would not have taken 10 weeks into the regular season to get a deal done. It could have been done yesterday (as it was with the Ravens). This is just the Bills pr campaign to justify the deal. My take is there is more to this than that meets the eye...I am sure the Bills would have given that kind of contract to Willis as part of his extension. I think Willis did not want to sign with the Bills and forced their hand into making a trade.....What I like about Willis is that at least he kept his mouth shut during this entire process there by letting the bills get fair trade value..win win for all the 3 sides in my opinion.
Koufax Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 The issue of a hold out is not over the money. We were not going to sign him to an extension. He can hold out 10 games if he wants, be active for the last six, and be a free agent. He has to be active for six weeks to get credit for the year of service towards free agency. So the ten week holdout is about forcing the Bills to sign him for more than they would (which wouldn't happen) or punishing them and not risking injury. Hasn't been done much, but it gets talked about sometimes. Because if you hold out all year you don't get credit for the time served and don't become a free agent. Our issue is not Willis vs. a contract to a lineman. This is not dollars like the Nate situation (who we would have loved to keep for a lot less money). This is the front office deciding we will be a better football player without Willis and replacing him with others, similar to the London situation (although we like London more). So Marv likes A-Train and a 2nd round pick, or whatever we end up with more than an unhappy Willis. Willis will likely have a good year for Baltimore, but it doesn't matter if our backs are successful for us at the same time (with secondary improvements to character, literacy, and lockerroom attitude as perks). Our issue now is finding the most production at RB, and Marv and Dick appear very confident that they can replace Willis's production elsewhere.
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 As I said, I know that you were not going to agree with me, and I certainly do not agree with you. At the risk of infuriating you (which is a risk I will just have to take), we will see which one of us is correct after the 2007 season. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be defending the guy so steadfastly if he was a Seminole instead of a 'Cane. I didn't hate Willis but I didn't think his heart was in playing for Buffalo. Hopefully this trade is a positive for all sides involved, until the Bills have to meet the Ravens.
Koufax Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 My take is there is more to this than that meets the eye...I am sure the Bills would have given that kind of contract to Willis as part of his extension. I think Willis did not want to sign with the Bills and forced their hand into making a trade.....What I like about Willis is that at least he kept his mouth shut during this entire process there by letting the bills get fair trade value..win win for all the 3 sides in my opinion. I don't think so. I don't think that Marv would want to go long term extension with low character...there is a difference between keeping guys around who were already there and signing extensions to people you don't like (Marv doesn't like Willis, even if he refuses to say it). And I think that the extension that Willis signed with Baltimore is a dumb one that overpays. More similar to the Edge contract than anything, and overpaying replaceable backs who are getting older (not that Willis is old, although I doubt his ribs or knee every feel truly young) is not a wise decision. I did want to keep Willis and I do think he will be successful over the next couple years, and possibly even great if circumstances align right. But I'm fine with this move as a way to improve our team
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Thanks for posting this. Appreciate getting to hear it. I know it's PR but all the same I believe Marv is setting the right direction for the team. So far we're seeing improvement absent pie-in-the-sky promises. I like it. Let's hope we see more in '07.
GG Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 We shall see just how "average" he is with the Ravens. You may want to compare what McGahee got to what the Bills are paying Dockery. As for the allegation that he did not know the playbook, I think that it is a bit sad that there appears to be a campaign to bad mouth him in the press to attempt to justify this deal -- which equates to essentially the same compensation as what the Bears got for Thomas Jones based on the NFL draft value chart. We shall see what happens. There's wordsmithing on both sides. The key hint that Bills' front office has been throwing out is that in the post season evaluation of the team, they reached the conclusion that WM will not be part of the team's future. It doesn't matter whether that is due to his "average" RB skills or just a bad fit for the team they're trying to create. It also doesn't matter whether Willis becomes an all-world RB in Baltimore. It's clear to everyone that he wasn't dedicated to become that player in Buffalo, and that's all that should matter to Levy & Jauron.
Lurker Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 (Marv doesn't like Willis, even if he refuses to say it) Willis was the anti-Thurman -- the standard by which Marv will always evaluate his RBs. I haven't followed the the 2007 RB class much yet, but my guess is the guy that most resembles TT (football character as well as running/catching style) is who Marv will be looking at, regardless of what round he's picked.
nucci Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 There's wordsmithing on both sides. The key hint that Bills' front office has been throwing out is that in the post season evaluation of the team, they reached the conclusion that WM will not be part of the team's future. It doesn't matter whether that is due to his "average" RB skills or just a bad fit for the team they're trying to create. It also doesn't matter whether Willis becomes an all-world RB in Baltimore. It's clear to everyone that he wasn't dedicated to become that player in Buffalo, and that's all that should matter to Levy & Jauron. Excellent post and I believe that is exactly what Marv and Co. were thinking.
todd Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 As I said, I know that you were not going to agree with me, and I certainly do not agree with you. At the risk of infuriating you (which is a risk I will just have to take), we will see which one of us is correct after the 2007 season. Oh, there's nothing here that could infuriate me. It is only a web board, for Pete's sake (ha). However, "we'll see" validates my point. There aren't facts to back up yours.
Peter Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Oh, there's nothing here that could infuriate me. It is only a web board, for Pete's sake (ha). However, "we'll see" validates my point. There aren't facts to back up yours. Read my several posts on the subject.
anton0575 Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 To all ungratefull and perfect Buffalo fans...Willis did not play 2 games and played with Broken ribs for a hopeless team. Get it together, face the facts. Buffalo never intended to help him with his job. No rb wants to come here because they saw the film and they saw what Willis was playing behind. In some games Willis didn't have over 15 carries and was taken out of the game on 3rd down.
Christopher Capolupo Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 To all ungratefull and perfect Buffalo fans...Willis did not play 2 games and played with Broken ribs for a hopeless team. Get it together, face the facts. Buffalo never intended to help him with his job. No rb wants to come here because they saw the film and they saw what Willis was playing behind. In some games Willis didn't have over 15 carries and was taken out of the game on 3rd down. He was taken out on 3rd down if he didn't take himself out of the game before that.. And if he was playing hurt, it's because he doesn't want to seem imjury prone to a team that wants to acquire him.. He doesn't do it to help the team, he does it to help himself.. Don't give him too much credit.
Tipster19 Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 Hey thanks, I'm glad I heard that interview, now I know whose our starting RB. I'm not a McGahee fan by no stretch of the imagination but I don't wish him any harm either. I think he's just an ignorant kid who has some ability and alot more ego. I'm glad he's gone, he just doesn't realize his selfishness. What is important is the production of our run game, not what McGahee does. So c'mon A-Train, get your caboose moving and get us 1300+ yds. Go Bills!
ronnieroscoe Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 Based on the NFL draft value chart, the value of what we received equates to 259 points. The value of what the Bears received equates to 246 points. where is that draft value board posted
Git'er Done Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 I still think that the Bills wanted to get rid of Willis more than Willis wanted to leave. I think Willis knew he hadn't played that well and was worried because he knew that this contract would be the most important in his career.
The Senator Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 To all ungratefull and perfect Buffalo fans... ??? Actually, Willis is the ungrateful punk - the Bills saved his NFL career when no one else would go near the gimp. Willis did not play 2 games and played with Broken ribs for a hopeless team. Geez, ya think maybe one of the reasons the team was "hopeless" was having a stupid a$$ starting running back who doesn't know the playbook, or what down it is? Get it together, face the facts. Buffalo never intended to help him with his job. You need to face the facts... The facts are that Buffalo took a huge gamble with this kid whose knee was in shreds and whose future was in doubt - when no other NFL team would go near him, and knowing full well that he'd have to spend his entire rookie year rehabilitating his knee and getting back in shape. Buffalo was extremely patient and helpful to McGahee. Look what they got in return - an arrogant, ignorant punk who shoots his mouth off, has no work ethic, and who will never amount to anything more than a average NFL back. No rb wants to come here because they saw the film and they saw what Willis was playing behind. In some games Willis didn't have over 15 carries and was taken out of the game on 3rd down. Um...it's March 10th. There'll be plenty of running backs here when camps starts in July, and all of 'em will be jumping for the chance to run behind a O-Line of 6'8", 340-pound monsters. McStupid didn't even know what down it was half the time - the reason he got taken out is that he couldn't understand the plays being called, didn't know what he was supposed to do, or didn't know what down it was. And no wonder - instead of training with the team last Spring, he chose to stay in Florida and not to attend any of the OTAs, and never studied the playbook. Then there were those other times when he took himself out because he forgot to eat and needed to scarf down a cheesburger real quick - causing him to miss a play or two - or those other times he had to take himself out 'cause he couldn't run more than forty yards without puking all over the field. We're a better team with him gone. We need more young players like Evans, Whitner, Ko Simpson, Youboty, JP, etc., that know what is is to be part of a team and are not just seeking personal glory or the high lifestyle of an ersatz NFL 'star'! Screw McFucHead. Good riddance!
Recommended Posts