Bill from NYC
-
Posts
21,938 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Bill from NYC
-
-
-
19 reps does seem like a small number for a guy that size.
Remember Jamie Nails? He did about 19,000 reps and he STILL sucked. Did we draft any good blockers besides Ruben and Jennings in the last 10 years?
Sorry, I just cant sing the praise of Mike Williams. Not for 9.15 million dollars. Not yet.
-
Just a thought -- If we do franchise Nate at the end of the year? what makes people think we can't afford around a $10 salary for only one year. I know it sounds like a lot, but with a MW restructuring, DB hit gone, and really solid use of the cap, we could be able to afford him for a season making a trade not neccesary, once again giving TD the upperhand in negotiations. Clump may be better to tell us all if it is possible to clear out that much cap room for next year or not.
There is not a cornerback who ever played the game that deserves 1/8 of the salary cap of an NFL Football Team.
-
That's a ridiculous comment. The Antoine contract and cap number was to take advantage of the Vikings cap situation, meaning they could pay him a lot early because they had room, and they would not suffer down the line. Teams would love to do this if they had the room, and his cap number had ZERO to do with his worth as player.
But these salaries do as you know effect the cost of the "Franchise" Tag.
I am saying that there is a very substantial risk of losing NC after this season, and this adds to it.
-
Close to it. Fans throw around those numbers, especially Top 5 way too easily. Top five is basically starting on the first team All-Pro. He was my favorite Bill. But his lack of INTs certainly would keep him from the top five in the entire league. I have been as hard on Clements as anyone here but if Clements ups his game this year the same amount he upped it each of the last three years, he will be a top 10 (equaling pro bowl) and maybe top 5 for sure.
Furthermore, very few if any of even the most diehard Antoine fans, myself included, thought he should have been signed for what he signed for. And with the way the defense played last year, I think it was proven to be true.
Sorry, but this post is confusing.
Do you put it forth as evidence that TD does or does not re-sign star players?
Also, when speaking of TD, do you count his record of re-signing top players at Pittsburgh?
-
You do your arguments against Henry a disservice by making unsupportable claims of his failings.
What about the actual events leads you to say that Henry was a MAJOR (your capitalization not mine) contributor to 4 straight losses.
Game 1- 13-10 loss to Jacksonville- Henry did not play a great game by any means as he got a mere 3.3 yards per carry. However, his 75 yards seem pretty far from a major contribution to the loss. The Jax D was a good one and tough against the run and while Bill's Daily is not the Bible in terms of the spoken word they gave a grade of B to a running game which Henry was the bulk performer. I think folks point to an overall failure of the O as a lead factor in the lost and Henry was a certainly a part of the O, but given the poor Bledsoe performance even allocating his share takes him pretty far away from major. In fact anyone casting blame probably points to the D and Clements going for the INT when knovking it down would have put up the W as the play that stands out along with a couple of other bad plays by the D on that drive.
In addition, lest you want to somehow try to build a case for a switch to WM being the key factor, Henry actually suffered an injury that saw WM get cnsistent action for the 4th quarter and he also was able to log a massive 3.4 ypc on his 9 carries.
Game 2- 13-10 loss to Oakland- A worse performance by Henry in this game, but still falls short of your diatribe as a major factor. Again he registered 3.2 yards a pop and his total of 67 yards was not good and one might even throw in hi couple of drops and his rumbling bumbling stumbling failing to get into the endzone to earn him the title of being bad that day. However, to site his play as the MAJOR factor and let Bledsoe, other players and even the refs who missed so many pivotal calls even the NFL was forced into a meaningless apology really les a bunch of miscreants off the hook merely to try to prove your point rather than describe reality.
Again, if you wan t to try to hold your all we needed was to switch RBs point, WM certainly did not get enough carries this game to establish a rhytym, but losing 10 yards on his firstcarry probably had something to do with that. Also of interest there was a missed blitz pick-up this game but it was by Shelton rather than the usual whipping boy Henry.
I think it is fair to ding Henry as a contributor to this loss, but MAJOR is not the case.
Game 3- 31-17 loss to NE- I think bills' Daily is being quite charitable to Henry summarizing this outing as solid and pointing to his 98 yards gained on 24 carries to support this claim. They do make mention of him falling down on a 3rd and 1 and do not attribute his likely role in the NE TD fumble where he and Bledsoe went different ways. However, even if you want to blame both of these plays totally on Henry (you really have to be in love with Bledsoe to do this) the Henry performance is at worst a mixed bag some good some bad performance rather than the major cause of this loss.
Game 4- 16-14 loss to NYJ- This is perhaps the most inexplicable of the claims that Henry was a majpr factor in this loss as he suffered and injury and only got 12 carries. Maybe he was the MAJOR contributor here because he should have got injured sooner. I would label him as being more of a non-factor when we want more from our RB, but if he was a major factor in this loss then was WM who got 42 yards on his 8 carries (21 of which came on one play actually) also a major factor as he and TH really split responsibility in this game due to the TH injury.
At any rate in total, i think it is fair to say that Henry was a key factor (though not the major one as Bledsoe lays first claim to this apellation for almost all losses) in the Oakland loss, a mixed factor in the NE game, a non-facor in the NYJ game and a tough contributor in the Jax game at worse.
You are giving him a free pass on missed blocks, sacks galore and wrong passing routes but hey, dont let me stand in your way!
-
-
Well, my mind is even more open than merely Mike Williams.
Possibilities are virtually unlimited. We could get a 1st in 06 AND a first day pick in 05. Some of our players (SA, LF, CV) are not young.
A trade such as this could be a chance to replenish this football team with young talent. This type of chance does not seem to come often.
-
Eric Moulds is the only major re-sign of TD's regime. I feel the only reason he did do that was because if he didn't, there would be a lynch mob after him.
At that point in time, Moulds was one of the top 5 WR's in the league. Everyone knew who Eric Moulds was in the Buffalo area, even if you weren't a football fan. He was (and still is) a Bill the likes of Jim Kelly, Thurman Thomas, Bruce Smith, and Andre Reed.
Yes, TD spends big money and the post you replied to commented on that. But for one reason or another, he doesn't like to re-sign people. He would rather replace them with substitutes, especially if money is an issue.
He was the same in Pittsburgh. TD is accustomed to working for not so wealthy owners, which is to our advantage.
One thing he also does is surprise us. This is another reason why I think that a deal will go down, as unlikely as it may seem right now.
-
In the long run, it's what should be done.
Nate Clements is one of the best players on our team. But face facts, this is his last year as a Buffalo Bill. TD may be a "genius", but he doesn't re-sign ANYONE. Especially when you try and think of the type of money Nate's going to get next year. He let Peerless walk, he let Antoine Winfield walk, he let Jonas Jennings walk, he let Pat Williams walk and if you think he's going to shell out the "Top 10 CB" money; you're dillusional.
So now we have to look at it like this, trade Nate for a top ten pick or keep Nate for one year and then get nothing. I feel as if a top ten pick who will be with us for many years to come is much more important than one year of Nate Clements play.
TD said it himself, our defense is incredible; but our offense isn't good enough. Yes we have Willis McGahee. Yes we have Eric Moulds and Lee Evans. But that's where it ends on offense. J.P. needs another weapon. On top of that, Eric Moulds doesn't have much time left. I'm not talking contract wise, i'm talking playing wise. This will be E-Moulds' 10th season and it's starting to show (not to mention we're one slow-starting rookie QB away from him "rethinking" things again).
TD is sitting on a whole bunch of money, which is very unlike him (funny how he never resigns anyone, but throws all sorts of money around for FA's). He hasn't made many moves because he's waiting for the draft. But why would you do that with only a #55? I honestly think he has something up his sleeve. Maybe not a trade involving Nate, but he's cooking something.
If I were TD, i'd pull the trigger on a trade involving Nate. But only for one person...... USC WR/TE Mike Williams. Here's a guy that we were very interested in last year before "The Maurice Rule" was appealed and defunct. His size has a lot of teams looking at him to play an Antonio Gates type role as TE, along with WR. This is the perfect type of addition to our offense! And with Moulds, Evan, and Williams; along with McGahee in the backfield, J.P. is loaded with help.
Now the rumor is: Nate to Washington for #9. But here's a couple scenarios I see as possibilities:
Nate and Travis to Arizona for #8 and L.J. Shelton - Arizona needs two things: a RB and a CB. We've been prolifically working on a deal involving Shelton and Henry. But we just can't seem to agree on compensation. Arizona is going to draft one or the other, why not take care of both with the #8 and ship out L.J.? It makes perfect sense for both teams. The only thing is, we'd need to move up to at least #6 (in front of Minnesota) to get MW. But from #8, it shouldn't take more than a 3rd rounder to get to 6 (the same type of deal would apply if we sent Nate to Washington for a #9). Especially since they'll (Tennesee) most likely take a CB as it is. It's essentially the same deal as below, but with a #3 and L.J. Shelton (which is a fair deal to me).
Nate and Travis to Tennessee for #6 - Almost the same things apply here. Tennessee needs all the help they can get. CB and RB being two huge needs and one of the two will be addressed by Tennessee with this pick. Why not take care of both? As for L.J. Shelton, this move forces Arizona to pick a RB. We'll just throw a #3 their way for L.J., i'm sure they'll bite.
I know people are going to be saying "Nate Clements and Travis Henry for Mike Williams; a rookie?!" Well it's not as bad as it sounds when you look at it from this perspective; Travis Henry will NOT play for us. Even if he does, he won't see the light of day on the field and next year he's gone. Nate Clements will be amazing as always for Buffalo in 2005. But that's all we get as far as Nate goes. Nate in 05 because in 06.... he's gone.
Mike Williams would give us that boost on offense we need and none of the trades I propose are unrealistic. Other teams would jump at a package like that. So what about CB with Nate gone you ask? Well, we draft a CB in the second, third, or forth round and take some of our $6.5 in cap money and sign a veteran like Ty Law or Andre Dyson. There was too much talk by EVERYONE to discount Law not being here for a visit. I do believe he at least stopped by to check out the place. But I think it was kept on the downlow for a reason. Using a pick in the top four rounds should get you a good CB to groom (ala Terrence McGee). Then if you add another veteran like Law, we're in a good position. So what about other positions of need?
DT - I feel that TD addressed it last year with the drafting of Tim Anderson. Do you honestly feel that TD's going to spend a 3rd rounder on a DT from Ohio State and not use him? Combined with Ron Edwards 4 sack season and you have a couple guys who could step up. I'd be surprised if we got another DT going into the season. I think TD feels set and if ever a position to sacrifice a little defense for the offense, DT would be it.
OL - Dear god, I really don't understand why everyone wants to draft an OL. Maybe if we didn't have a shot at Shelton, but it's pretty much a given. Let's say we get Shelton then our OL looks like this:
L.J. Shelton (LT)
Bennie Anderson (LG)
Trey Teague ©
Chris Villarial (RG)
Mike Williams (RT)
-
Mike Gandy
Justin Bannan
Ross Tucker
Lawrence Smith
Ben Sobieski
Dylan McFarland
Jason Peters
HOW MANY LINEMAN DO WE NEED?!
TE - With Campbell and Euhus coming back, we're back to square one and that's not all bad. But MW is being scouted as a TE as well. I think he would flourish playing TE and slot reciever.
K - Oh man, the Nugent factor. I can't believe how many Bills fans this guy has. As long as we still have a 2nd after whatever trade up we make, if he's still there than definitely go for it. But I feel we're stuck with Lindell. There is no one out there on the market and we need help in other places more important than kicker. I cna't envision TD spending our top pick on a kicker.
The bottom line is we're in a good position and these things are entirely possible. Do I think it will happen? Probably not. But i'd love to give it a try if I were TD. Mike Williams is one of the only good players in this draft and there are tons of teams that want him. I think if trading Nate would get us a shot at him, it should be done.
Thank you for a well thought post.
It is hard to say exactly what we would get in exchange for NC. My feeling is that if there is little likelihood of keeping him after 05, a trade is in order. I am thinking that if JP can play (not a given), losing NC will not necessarily impede the Bills from being a playoff team.
Additionally, the Bills have a history of signing cbs in round 1 and losing them with no compensation. Imo, TD will break that trend. I expect NC to be traded to the Redskins on draft day.
We shall see.
-
Good point! A win could serve to build his confidence.
I also hope that the only NY team is inspired that much more to begin our season on 9/11.
GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Never Forget!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
It's hard to accept because it's an opinion in a vacum. Sure he MIGHT have had more value, but then the Bills would have been in a very precarious situation at the RB position. We certainly wouldn't have wanted anyone with LESS value to replace Henry, now would we? A couple of 1300 yard seasons isn't something to fart at.
I just love opinions in a vacum.
Todd, you and I have agreed and disagreed on issues for many, many years, and I have always enjoyed bantering back and forth with you. You have been a mainstay on TBD for years, and I always check out what you have to say.
I dont know about this sportswriter, but please, will you allow me the dignity of admitting that my thoughts about Travis have been consistent from day one?
-
Hang tough Mike. It is wonderful to hear that you are doing better.
God Bless.
BfNYC
-
The above is assuming that TD was unable, for whatever reason, to bring in a superior backup to Travis, who was a MAJOR contributor to 4 straight losses. In fact, as soon as his sorry, stupid ass was pulled from the football field, the Bills started winning.
Yes, Travis had a MUCH higher value before he stunk up the field (and was injured to boot) in the 04 season. What makes this so hard to accept?
-
-
Good question. Maybe because of the GW connection, and of course the fact that Nate is a proven star, as well as a very good return man.
-
Take this...
"We're not interested in that. We've told them that," Donahoe said. "When we receive from somebody what we feel as a staff is a fair trade, we'll make the trade, and if not, we're not going to trade him just to trade him. ... A lot of things could change in the next couple weeks."
-Rochester D&C
I still can't believe how many Bills fans here had downgraded Travis Henry to the point of wanting that grand larceny trade to go down.
Arizona can shove it.
Kudos to TD and staff for not trading for a player that they do not think is very good. This however does not mean that Henry is a sought after commodity.
-
hold your horses there re the super bowl. is it too much to ask to shoot for the playoffs?? i mean, it's not like we've made the playoffs since the last millennium. if you're going to let premier players walk for 2-years-down-the-road draft picks because you've given up on this year even before it's started, well, i have a problem with that. did anyone think the pats would win the super bowl in 01 with essentially a rookie at qb? that pitt would go 15-1 with a rookie?
You raise an excellent point. The thing is, are you willing to take the risk of letting Nate walk without getting any compensation?
The franchise tag is too big of a risk imo, and I seriously doubt that RW is going to cough up a 15 million dollar signing bonus to a cornerback.
Seriously, what chance do you give the Bills on keeping Nate after 05?
-
Though he is being consistent. He was very critical last off season for not trading Henry because he thought his value had peaked after coming off a decent season. Now, after a season sitting on the bench, Henry being one year older (every year is Huge for RBs) his value has decreased. In this way Sullivan is correct.
Agreed.
I too was hoping for a trade at that time. Miami had a really big need, and we probably would have got far more than Henry was worth from them.
-
-
Assuming the Shelton Trade is dead and the Clements rumor has some merit, I'll take a stab for fun.
The Skins have a brief " win now " window, much like the Cowboys, due to their HOF Coach only wanting to coach 1 or 2 more years. The Skins would prefer Vets/Free Agents over rookies.
Clements saw A. Winfield get a 10 Mil bonus and a sick contract from the Vikings. He's believes he's a better player and wants his payday. Conclusion - He'll never get that here. The top 10 CB pay scale is bloated, IMO. So we keep him for a year and then he walks. The Franchise and trade idea isn't practical,unless you have a known tarding partner, like the Bills did with Peerless. Otherwise, you're stuck paying Clements 10 Mil. That's poor cap management. So he walks and in 2007, we get some compensation pick for him ( Yawn ).
Or we trade him to the Skins for picks this year and a day 1 pick next year. The #9 pick in Round 1 this year will be vastly overpaid in a draft lacking Blue chip prospects. Hard to seperate pick #3 from pick #30, according to most scouts. Skins don't have a 2nd Rounder. So...
Trade Clements for a 3rd and 4th this year, plus a day 1 pick next year. ( the 2006 Draft is far stronger and has depth at LT ). This Draft IS deep at one position... CB. I believe the Bills are going to take one in Round 2, regardless of the Clements situation. Target the right guy to replace Clements this year, then grab some needed depth with multiple picks in round 3 and 4 at DT,OL,RB etc.
Teague may be gone after 2005, so bounce him outside to LT, for now. April 2006 will give us a better pool of quality LT's to chose from, according to Ourlads and Draft Insider. Tucker played well at Center, for an injured Teague, in case some didn't notice. Losman has a tendency to roll to his right, so the LT blindside worry is decreased. Plus I see the Bills running a lot of sweeps to the right this year,with a first year QB.
As far as Henry is concerned, hold onto him and see what pops up on Draft day. If someone offers a 3rd, take it. If it's a conditional pick next year, so be it. If he's still here during the summer, someone will probably offer something, due to an injury and concerns about being shorthanded for opening day. We have little choice but to be patient with that situation.
Mark, I think that your scenario is likely. The thing is, I am not even attempting to argue that NC is/isn't a very good player. Of course he is a top corner!
Historically, our corners (Smith, Winfield, Burress) tend to be drafted early and then walk, bringing no compensation for the team. Ralph is NOT Paul Allen (nor Snyder) and I cant see him handing a 15 million dollar signing bonus to a corner.
If it is a given that Nate will walk after the 05 season, a trade would be in order. Would it hurt the Bills this season? Yes. Nate is one of our best players. Will it mean the difference of winning or not winning the superbowl this year? I dont think so.
I WOULD however want a #1 in 06 as part of the deal.
-
Good post Harvey. I do not think either scenario is far-fetched.
-
19 slots in the second round AND an early 3rd round pck for Travis Henry? Not enough. This is a weak draft, right?
I say we hold out for TB's 1st and 2nd in 05 and their 1st in 06. Travis Henry is obviously a hot commodity, so we might as well get all we can for him.
-
You're forgetting and continue to forget one important element. I have never said Losman was going to be great. I have never said he is going to be a star. In fact, the only thing I remember saying about his talent here lately is that if I was a GM I would like Alex Smith instead. I don't know where the hell you get the idea that I think Losman should be enshrined in Canton already. I liked what I saw in the pre-season games last year on TV and when I went to training camp but that's it. I think if Drew plays well and the Bills beat Pittsburgh that last game that Drew would still be our QB. I think Losman will be exciting and has potential and I'm glad he's here because he has a chance.
I am behind him 100% right now because he's our future. But I was just responding to your ill-conceived post that he hasn't proven anything. The Bills watched him in practice and they looked at their team and they said we're a better team with JP than we are with Drew. They said this in public and they said it by their actions. So when you say he hasn't proved a thing, and add foolish superlatives after it, I responded in kind.
I don't know why you brought Ryan Leaf into the equation either. He was never a star but he was a starter who proved to be a dismal failure. But the Chargers brass didn't get to see him every day in practice for a year before they made their pick, they just watched a bunch of film in college, like everyone else.
Points well taken but for the record, the Bills staff did not get to watch JP practice for a year either. Much of that time he was either on crutches, a cast or in traction for having brushed up against a defensive back.
I share your excitement about the possibility that JP does bring. I want to cheer him to victory at RWS, and will do so. Within a few days, I will know when we will be going up for our 12th consecutive year, and I cannot wait. Before the end of the month, we will have our car rental and hotel reservations.
I love this football team and WNY. Sadly, it is not in my nature to be a blind optimist.
Some thoughts on why no Henry trade
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I think quite highly of Nate as a player, but I dont like him enough to risk a franchise tag for 9 or 10 million dollars, nor to give him a 15 million dollar signing bonus to go along with a huge salary.