Doug Whaley - The Tim Graham Feature Story

[Sisyphean Bills]

I don't read his column very often. But, the way the research is done, which is something I know a little bit about, is completely biased. Don't know him, don't care too, if someone who worked for me, executed research the way he did in the article, I'd be less than thrilled. He was working like a prosecutor with an agenda. I guess if you think that is his job, you're entitled to your opinion. If I'm on the jury, I disregard the evidence he is presenting.

 

Interesting. I thought I read a sports article in a newspaper, not a peer-reviewed research paper. Nor did it feel like sitting in the jury box to evaluate a legal case on attorney likability.

 

I agree that there is a shot-gun blast of nuggets of information presented in the article. Not all of the nuggets are conclusive nor absolute.

 

What is clear from very title is the article will critique GM Whaley's job performance. I didn't find it at all surprising that the text had a critical tone. As yet another failed season closes, the topic of evaluating this organization, what it does and doesn't do to continue to come up short repeatedly, seems perfectly germane.

 

Failure leads to criticism. Success to kudos. But agendas are about positioning failures as successes and successes as failures.

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

 

Interesting. I thought I read a sports article in a newspaper, not a peer-reviewed research paper. Nor did it feel like sitting in the jury box to evaluate a legal case on attorney likability.

 

I agree that there is a shot-gun blast of nuggets of information presented in the article. Not all of the nuggets are conclusive nor absolute.

 

What is clear from very title is the article will critique GM Whaley's job performance. I didn't find it at all surprising that the text had a critical tone. As yet another failed season closes, the topic of evaluating this organization, what it does and doesn't do to continue to come up short repeatedly, seems perfectly germane.

 

Failure leads to criticism. Success to kudos. But agendas are about positioning failures as successes and successes as failures.

You are entitled to you opinion. Mine remains unchanged. Never heard that definition of an agenda before.

 

Yeah it is.

 

Also, I'm going to break it to you that all prosecutors have "an agenda"---it's called getting a conviction for a perpetrator who they are convinced committed a crime. Crazy, huh?

IMHO. Have a nice day.

[Sisyphean Bills]

the article has nothing to do with critical thinking. His premise can't stand up to simple question like of the draft picks how many play, or how weak was the roster when he started drafting.

 

Hunh? No one said Graham's article was about critical thinking.

 

Ad hominem attacking the author and/or his sources is a lack of critical thinking. It's a argumentative fallacy. It proves nothing and isn't persuasive in the least.

 

 

 

The whole premise is flawed when Whaley hasn't been gm long enough to have 66 percent of the roster.

 

The above line is a fiction. The data didn't break down rosters based on partitioning out "regimes" within all the organizations.

[dpberr]

Whaley is an ok GM. Not great. Not terrible. He builds an 8-8 or 9-7 team. An ok team.

 

Unfortunately, being ok isn't good enough in Buffalo where the drought looms large.

 

You need to be on a John Butler level to get over that hump.

[The Big Cat]

I don't know. Pretty clear to me that Graham's never had a nice thing to say about the Bills and that he's cherry picking some make believe metric to continue his streak. Call it a narrative, call it an agenda (I have a theory for a later date, but we'll get to that), but he's adamantly pursuing logic that's wildly flawed and contradictory and he's using it as a means to his same old same old ends. You can call that whatever you want. It's pretty clear to me what it is.

[Coach Tuesday]

I don't know. Pretty clear to me that Graham's never had a nice thing to say about the Bills and that he's cherry picking some make believe metric to continue his streak. Call it a narrative, call it an agenda (I have a theory for a later date, but we'll get to that), but he's adamantly pursuing logic that's wildly flawed and contradictory and he's using it as a means to his same old same old ends. You can call that whatever you want. It's pretty clear to me what it is.

 

Fine, maybe so ...but he also happens to be right. I think that's Dave's point.

[The Big Cat]

 

Fine, maybe so ...but he also happens to be right. I think that's Dave's point.

 

Right about what? That the Bills are mediocre. HOLY **** BALLS STOP THE PRESSES

 

Right about his team building theory? That's debatable. At best.

[Coach Tuesday]

 

Right about what? That the Bills are mediocre. HOLY **** BALLS STOP THE PRESSES

 

Right about his team building theory? That's debatable. At best.

 

Right that the Bills have not used their draft assets in an intelligent, strategic, sustainable or responsible way. You disagree?

[The Big Cat]

 

Right that the Bills have not used their draft assets in an intelligent, strategic, sustainable or responsible way. You disagree?

 

I don't think it's that simple, frankly. Tough to do all the things you mention above when you turnover the administration and strategy every 30 months. Also tough to evaluate that way relative to other teams, particularly those set at the most important position. The article only needed to be 20 words long:

 

You need a QB to win in the NFL. Doug Whaley has not done a good enough job getting one.

[BringBackOrton]

 

I don't think it's that simple, frankly. Tough to do all the things you mention above when you turnover the administration and strategy every 30 months. Also tough to evaluate that way relative to other teams, particularly those set at the most important position. The article only needed to be 20 words long:

 

You need a QB to win in the NFL. Doug Whaley has not done a good enough job getting one.

Doug Whaley has gotten fired and rehired every 30 months? Link?

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

 

I don't think it's that simple, frankly. Tough to do all the things you mention above when you turnover the administration and strategy every 30 months. Also tough to evaluate that way relative to other teams, particularly those set at the most important position. The article only needed to be 20 words long:

 

You need a QB to win in the NFL. Doug Whaley has not done a good enough job getting one.

Good Post. You and I both know that the Pegulas are not using this as any evidence to fire the guy. And, rightfully so!

 

If he is fired, it will be after they have gone through a process, one knows everything going on behind the scenes. Not because of some garbage metric contrived to further the narrative.

[Pirate Angel]

Whaley has done some good things..He is exceptional at finding players zone the waiver wire and overlooked free agents to come in and contribute. Not saying he is a great GM but he isn't all bad.

[K-9]

Graham is a talented feature writer and he would be better served by sticking to his strengths.

 

Anyone not in a coma since their inception knows the Bills are an historically poorly run franchise from top to bottom for the most part. You don't become the losingest franchise in all of north American pro sports over 25 year stretches like they once did without being poorly run. And I have no issue with anyone seeking to illustrate that through whatever statistical analysis they wish to employ.

 

I have an issue with a reporter that intentionally propogates bald faced lies as Graham did by asserting Whaley doesn't scout underclassmen until after they declare. This couldn't be farther from the truth and Graham was lazy in not seeking another source to refute that claim. This puts the entire article under a cloud and confirms he was more interested in shoehorning information to fit a predisposed conclusion.

 

There is a term for that kind of "journalism."

Edited December 22, 2016 by K-9

[dave mcbride]

Graham is a talented feature writer and he would be better served by sticking to his strengths.

 

Anyone not in a coma since their inception knows the Bills are an historically poorly run franchise from top to bottom for the most part. You don't become the losingest franchise in all of north American pro sports over 25 year stretches like they once did without being poorly run. And I have no issue with anyone seeking to illustrate that through whatever statistical analysis they wish to employ.

 

I have an issue with a reporter that intentionally propogates bald faced lies as Graham did by asserting Whaley doesn't scout underclassmen until after they declare. This couldn't be farther from the truth and Graham was lazy in not seeking another source to refute that claim. This puts the entire article under a cloud and confirms he was more interested in shoehorning information to fit a predisposed conclusion.

 

There is a term for that kind of "journalism."

 

I don't know how true your claim is here. It may be the case that they don't scout underclassmen en masse as a practice but do scout truly elite guys who are obvious blue chip first rounders. Saying he scouted Sammy doesn't invalidate the claim, at least in my opinion. But more clarity would be helpful.

[The Big Cat]

 

I don't know how true your claim is here. It may be the case that they don't scout underclassmen en masse as a practice but do scout truly elite guys who are obvious blue chip first rounders. Saying he scouted Sammy doesn't invalidate the claim, at least in my opinion. But more clarity would be helpful.

 

Doug Whaley shouldn't have to clarify something that was falsely reported on.

[Mr. WEO]

I don't know. Pretty clear to me that Graham's never had a nice thing to say about the Bills and that he's cherry picking some make believe metric to continue his streak. Call it a narrative, call it an agenda (I have a theory for a later date, but we'll get to that), but he's adamantly pursuing logic that's wildly flawed and contradictory and he's using it as a means to his same old same old ends. You can call that whatever you want. It's pretty clear to me what it is.

 

 

 

I don't think it's that simple, frankly. Tough to do all the things you mention above when you turnover the administration and strategy every 30 months. Also tough to evaluate that way relative to other teams, particularly those set at the most important position. The article only needed to be 20 words long:

 

You need a QB to win in the NFL. Doug Whaley has not done a good enough job getting one.

 

 

Good teams build rosters through good drafting is now a "wildly flawed" concept?

 

OK.

 

Also, not having a "franchise QB" should not have prevented Whaley from drafting better in general.. He has also ignored the TE position. The D he has assembled is mediocre---at best.

[26CornerBlitz]

 

 

 

 

Good teams build rosters through good drafting is now a "wildly flawed" concept?

 

OK.

 

Also, not having a "franchise QB" should not have prevented Whaley from drafting better in general.. He has also ignored the TE position. The D he has assembled is mediocre---at best.

 

2014?

[K-9]

I don't know how true your claim is here. It may be the case that they don't scout underclassmen en masse as a practice but do scout truly elite guys who are obvious blue chip first rounders. Saying he scouted Sammy doesn't invalidate the claim, at least in my opinion. But more clarity would be helpful.

 

I personally know scouts, both directly and indirectly employed by the Bills, who are tasked with scouting underclassmen. I personally know scouts who have sat with and compiled notes along side Whaley while in attendance at various venues featuring specifically targeted underclassmen.

 

I use Watkins as an example because of it's recent relevance and magnitude. But why stop there? Our last three tops picks in drafts have all been underclassmen and Graham would have us believe that they weren't scouted until later on in the process when the exact opposite is true; as projected high draft choices in the spring before their final college seasons, they were specifically targeted and assigned. That's just SOP for every NFL team and has been since underclassmen have been eligible.

 

Believe what you want. I don't really care. But I have a low tolerance for blatant bullschit propagated in the absence of rigorous journalistic practice. Graham could have easily checked other sources to verify the one he used in his story.

[yungmack]

Fine, maybe so ...but he also happens to be right. I think that's Dave's point.

No he's not.

Right that the Bills have not used their draft assets in an intelligent, strategic, sustainable or responsible way. You disagree?

And who's responsible for using those draft assets?

[Malazan]

Man, timmah has been very angry since being fired by ESPN and removed from writing non-football features at TBN