finknottle

Cap hit isn't the issue, just the cap itself. Willis' 5 year deal in 2003 (actually giving us only 4 years of service, we knew that going in) cost 7.053 million dollars. Travis' 4 year deal in 2001 cost 2.29 million dollars. The cap was 67.1 million in 2001, and rose to 75 million in 2003. Taking into account the increase, Willis still eats up about three times as much of the teams cap space as Travis did. Is he three times the player? Is he making three times the contribution?

But he's our runningback! That definately makes him top 5, regardless of the numbers.

Fine. Is it worth it to the franchise to devote a large chunk of the cap to him instead of signing a lineman? Does he give you that much more than the Atrain? (This is basically a continuation of the argument whether Willis is four times better than Henry was, since he chews up four times the cap room.)

I agree - none of the TE's were special. Except, of course, for Pete Metzellars, who was a guaranteed catch-and-fall-down, even when he was wide open. And was it Metzellars who had something like 7 receptions, 7 TD's on the season at one point? Or am I thinking of somebody else?

Exactly what happens to anybody else who rip off your companies. You slap tariffs on them. Last time I checked, the Seneca don't have a lot of trading partners.

I was not an Atrain guy in the off-season, nor did I think he would contribute much. I've come around a little. I still think WM is the better back, but if I need three hard yards against a tough defense I want Atrain instead. He just plays harder.

No. The reasoning goes like this. The NFL holds the rights to the games and they can only be shown with their permission. A foreign country who chooses to ignore their wishes is in effect in violation of international copyright law. Allowing a station to broadcast without permission would be no different than if the Seneca allowed their companies to pirate books and movies for resale. If the Seneca are signatories to WTO or some other framework, then they would be in trouble if they completely ignored the NFL's rights.

I am a huge Marv fan, but I think his game plans - particularly halftime adjustments - were his weakness. He brought character and resiliance to the team, not x's and o's.

And it the economy does have to transition to other energy sources, better now while there is still oil left than later. Just imagine the world in 40 years if these clowns get their way - simultanously dealing with global warming, overpopulation, depleted oceans, depleted energy sources, and a bankrupt government. Well, maybe the right package of tax cuts will keep things going...

In fact, the best part of listening to DC sports radio is all the irate callers and commentators asking why the Williams-Gray defence keeps playing the corners 10 yards off the receiver, lol. Feels like old times.

That's what I remember, and he was actively discussed as the heir apparent two years ago. This year, on local talk radio he is shaping up the be the fall guy (rightfully so) and a possibility to be let go.

I don't agree with him, but c'mon! That's exactly what the JP faithfull were saying about Holcomb starting - he'll get us a win or two more, and that will only hurt our draft. I guess it depends on which qb is being discussed.

Dickerson's comments are rather ironic. While he went on to have the better NFL career, he wasn't able to earn the starting job in college from that very same white guy. Dickerson and James alternated starts at SMU, and (if I remember correctly) were known as the 'Pony Express.'

I've noticed that the team whose quarterback takes a one-yard loss on three consecutive plays to end each half usually wins the game. Is this a good strategy?

I think you have to start him until he has one *full* season behind a *good* offensive line - say, with at least one pro-bowler. That assumes we still have talent at RB and WR too; if not, it wouldn't be fair to judge him.

He is over-rated in Buffalo. Outside the region they see him for what he is - a legit starter, but nothing to get excited about. Definately nobody worth mentioning. It's only here that you hear the 'Run the damn ball' talk and predictions of record-setting seasons.

Is this an argument for starting Nall?

No, the answer is to be realistic about evaluating players on an imperfect team, and to be willing to occasionally get it wrong. If you don't, you'll fritter away years saying "I can't evaluate so-and-so because such-and-such wasn't good enough this year. I'll have to fix that next year and then see."

Guess what - there are no clear decisions in life, and darn few in football. So how long should we be willing to wait for all the stars to be aligned, on an imperfect team, so that we can be certain whether a guy is part of the solution or not? Do we wait until we have at least two pro-bowlers on the line?

I was enjoying the warm afterglow of the Redskins post-game show and the cries of the fans demanding their first rounder replace Brunell. I started thinking about Spurrier. I believe he bailed because ownership cut his qb and dictated that Ramsey was the future. I think history has settled that. So lets think about Mularkey. Suppose he believed that the atmosphere was such that the terms of his remaining entailed that he would be forced to commit to JP. Suppose, having coached JP, he believed that he simply did not have the skills to be an NFL qb. Mularkey would take the fall. Something to think about.

Wait a minute, wasn't the coaching last years excuse? Do we lighten up and begin the JP assessment again next year?

Factor in the salaries. I'd rather have Henry *and* a decent depth guy for the price of WM.

Therein lies the problem. Suppose the rest of the season continues as is for JP. Are we to, again, give him a mulligan? Are we going to say "Get some good linemen and give JP 16 games with them in 07 and see what he does before you judge him"? What if the linemen don't develop quickly enough? Do we wait 'till 08? When do we stop evaluating a player on a team with flaws?

As opposed to the knowledgable fans that begin every post on this topic with "He'll be fine." I don't know what to expect, but I am troubled by what I've seen so far.

But wait a minute, isn't WM supposed to be a top 5 back? Maybe we should merge the apologies and excuses into a single thread.