Now Clayton (per AZ board) says Henry trade will

[PIZ]

Just throwing this out there for you:

 

AZ board

[Campy]

Just throwing this out there for you:

 

AZ board

295007[/snapback]

Reading their board was interesting. I guess I never really thought that anyone cared that much about the Cardinals.

 

It also reminded me how lucky we are to have had the success we've had over the years...

[BuckeyeBill]

Amazing.... Cardinal fans to exist.

 

Watch for TH to be a major mistake for the Cards. They need him, and they will bow to TD's request to switch seconds. He will be a bust on that sorry team.

 

Hope they won't be reading this.

[1billsfan]

Just throwing this out there for you:

 

AZ board

295007[/snapback]

 

No way do we trade Henry staight up for Shelton. Clayton is smokin grass on this one. Shelton is a bust while Henry has proven NFL skills. TD will tell Green to take a hike if a player swap is the only way he trades Shelton. We can then wait for them to cut him June 1st.

[Bill from NYC]

No way do we trade Henry staight up for Shelton. Clayton is smokin grass on this one. Shelton is a bust while Henry has proven NFL skills. TD will tell Green to take a hike is a player swap is the only way he trades Shelton. We can then wait for them to cut him June 1st.

295072[/snapback]

 

Other than running (although in 04 he was better known for falling untouched and sliding), the skills of TH were proven to be bad, not good.

I dont know just how much you expect for TH, but it appears to be evident at this point that there is not a whole lot of interest around the league.

I wish they would dump him and move on.

[KRC]

Other than running (although in 04 he was better known for falling untouched and sliding), the skills of TH were proven to be bad, not good.

I dont know just how much you expect for TH, but it appears to be evident at this point that there is not a whole lot of interest around the league.

I wish they would dump him and move on.

295078[/snapback]

 

You still have some interest from the Cardinals. There is no reason to dump him yet because you can still get something for him.

[Dr. Fong]

We can then wait for them to cut him June 1st.

295072[/snapback]

 

And that's EXACTLY why the Bills need to get the swap of picks. And exactly why the Bills hold all the cards (no pun intended) in this situation. Despite the fact that the media is trying to force TD's hand.

[Bill from NYC]

You still have some interest from the Cardinals. There is no reason to dump him yet because you can still get something for him.

295081[/snapback]

 

Yes, what I meant to imply was that I am fine to say the least with an even up swap.

[1billsfan]

Other than running (although in 04 he was better known for falling untouched and sliding), the skills of TH were proven to be bad, not good.

I dont know just how much you expect for TH, but it appears to be evident at this point that there is not a whole lot of interest around the league.

I wish they would dump him and move on.

295078[/snapback]

 

Travis Henry ran for 1438 and 1356 yards in the two years before the 2004 season. Bad skills???? That's your opinion, and it's flat out wrong. I expect either the 2nd round swap with the Cards or a 2nd round pick in this years or the 2006 draft. We'll see.

[Bill from NYC]

Travis Henry ran for 1438 and 1356 yards in the two years before the 2004 season. Bad skills???? That's your opinion, and it's flat out wrong. I expect either the 2nd round swap with the Cards or a 2nd round pick in this years or the 2006 draft. We'll see.

295094[/snapback]

 

So you are happy with his blitz pickups, blocking, ball handling, receiving, and pass route running?

Like I said, his "skills" are obviously poor.

[Kelly the Dog]

Other than running (although in 04 he was better known for falling untouched and sliding), the skills of TH were proven to be bad, not good.

I dont know just how much you expect for TH, but it appears to be evident at this point that there is not a whole lot of interest around the league.

I wish they would dump him and move on.

295078[/snapback]

He scores TDs in large numbers, too, which is the object of the game. That is like saying "other than throwing a ton of strikes and having a great ERA, this pitcher is just bad and we should get rid of him." And try not to say "he doesn't win" because it is a team game and with your analogy, we should dump the entire team, especially Takeo Spikes, because none of them "win".

 

To further the pitcher analogy, it is safe to say that Henry is like a pitcher who throws a ton of strikes and has a great ERA but commits way too many errors, can't field all that well, doesn't strike out enough batters, and sometimes gives up untimely homeruns which keeps him just a very good or good player from being a great player, which people who quote his strike throwing and ERA often wrongly state that he is.

[Bill from NYC]

He scores TDs in large numbers, too, which is the object of the game. That is like saying "other than throwing a ton of strikes and having a great ERA, this pitcher is just bad and we should get rid of him." And try not to say "he doesn't win" because it is a team game and with your analogy, we should dump the entire team, especially Takeo Spikes, because none of them "win".

 

To further the pitcher analogy, it is safe to say that Henry is like a pitcher who throws a ton of strikes and has a great ERA but commits way too many errors, can't field all that well, doesn't strike out enough batters, and sometimes gives up untimely homeruns which keeps him just a very good or good player from being a great player, which people who quote his strike throwing and ERA often wrongly state that he is.

295107[/snapback]

 

It is also OK to win games in which a particular pitcher starts, right?

The Bills did not start to consistently win games until they benched Travis Henry and went with Willis, who does every single thing better than Henry.

C'mon, try again.

[Kelly the Dog]

It is also OK to win games in which a particular pitcher starts, right?

The Bills did not start to consistently win games until they benched Travis Henry and went with Willis, who does every single thing better than Henry.

C'mon, try again.   

295111[/snapback]

Which is much MORE true?

 

1. The Bills won games last year because Willis was inserted into the offense in place of Henry?

 

2. The Bills won games last year because the defense and special teams consistently got the ball back for the offense in great field position or scored themselves which put the rather lackluster offense in easy position to score?

[1billsfan]

So you are happy with his blitz pickups, blocking, ball handling, receiving, and pass route running?

Like I said, his "skills" are obviously poor.

295106[/snapback]

 

Dude, he's a "proven" 1,000 yard NFL runningback. If he were able to do all of the things you mentioned he would fetch a 1st round pick in a nanosecond. Shelton is a bust, period.

 

...and running for over 1,300 yards for two consecutive years is suddenly being equated as a runningback showing poor "skills"????

 

Like I said, you're flat out wrong.

[ajzepp]

It is also OK to win games in which a particular pitcher starts, right?

The Bills did not start to consistently win games until they benched Travis Henry and went with Willis, who does every single thing better than Henry.

C'mon, try again.   

295111[/snapback]

 

HOLD ON a minute, Bill.......TH speaks much better than Willis

[GG]

Which is much MORE true?

 

1. The Bills won games last year because Willis was inserted into the offense in place of Henry?

 

2. The Bills won games last year because the defense and special teams consistently got the ball back for the offense in great field position or scored themselves which put the rather lackluster offense in easy position to score?

295116[/snapback]

 

We're back to that poll?

 

To restate, after watching select replays of last year's games, the answer to me is very easy. Most of the credit is due to Willis's contribution. The D and ST were very effective early on, but the offense was missing a special juice.

 

I know there are theories that it finally took the offense 5 weeks to get its act together, there were injuries on OL, Bledsoe didn't find Evans until later on, etc.

 

But after watching the tapes, the answer is incontrovertible - it was Willis.

[1billsfan]

Which is much MORE true?

 

1. The Bills won games last year because Willis was inserted into the offense in place of Henry?

 

2. The Bills won games last year because the defense and special teams consistently got the ball back for the offense in great field position or scored themselves which put the rather lackluster offense in easy position to score?

295116[/snapback]

 

It's no use. These were the same people that were probably ready to let Peerless Price go instead of tagging him. We'll be right on draft day.

[Kelly the Dog]

We're back to that poll?

 

To restate, after watching select replays of last year's games, the answer to me is very easy.  Most of the credit is due to Willis's contribution.  The D and ST were very effective early on, but the offense was missing a special juice. 

 

I know there are theories that it finally took the offense 5 weeks to get its act together, there were injuries on OL, Bledsoe didn't find Evans until later on, etc. 

 

But after watching the tapes, the answer is incontrovertible - it was Willis.

295132[/snapback]

Did you "select" the games Willis played great? As I recall, and had posted when it happened, the Bills almost always came out passing and not running. And in more games than not, were ahead, or even comfortably ahead, by either passing or the defense or special teams, before Willis started churning out major yards. Not all games, of course, but just as many as not. Seattle comes to mind. St. Louis. Cleveland. Just off the top of my head.

 

NOT that I think Willis wasn't a huge factor, because I do. I think he is great, and better than Travis in every way. And I hope IF Travis is on the Bills this year that he never gets a carry the entire season, because that means Willis is in there. But IMO, although Willis was the single biggest difference on offense (except arguably Jim McNally and MM's offense) the line, Evans, the plays, the play-calling, the field position, the score, all played a significant part, and just below the addition of Willis.

 

I would also say, that if you had a healthy Travis in there this year, WITH all the other factors (the coaching, Evans, the line, the defense, the ST) and no Willis, the results would have been much closer to what they actually were compared to if you just stuck Willis in place of Henry on the 2003 team. What say you to that?

[VABills]

He scores TDs in large numbers, too, which is the object of the game. That is like saying "other than throwing a ton of strikes and having a great ERA, this pitcher is just bad and we should get rid of him." And try not to say "he doesn't win" because it is a team game and with your analogy, we should dump the entire team, especially Takeo Spikes, because none of them "win".

 

To further the pitcher analogy, it is safe to say that Henry is like a pitcher who throws a ton of strikes and has a great ERA but commits way too many errors, can't field all that well, doesn't strike out enough batters, and sometimes gives up untimely homeruns which keeps him just a very good or good player from being a great player, which people who quote his strike throwing and ERA often wrongly state that he is.

295107[/snapback]

Nice try at an analogy to baseball. But try this one:

 

One is a good closer who has a 94 MPH fastball. Not a lot of movement and will get a lot of stikes but no change-up, no curve, and no defensive ability. For several teams that would be fine.

 

But now you have a closer who throws a little faster, as a change, curve, split finger and is a good fielding pitcher.

 

Again the first is okay and would be a closer on some teams but would be better suited to being a setup /long reliever. But he wants the "aura" of being the closer, so you send him to another team that have far more issues so he can call himself a closer.

 

It's like Rivera vs. Worrell.

[Kelly the Dog]

Nice try at an analogy to baseball.  But try this one:

 

One is a good closer who has a 94 MPH fastball.  Not a lot of movement and will get a lot of stikes but no change-up, no curve, and no defensive ability.  For several teams that would be fine. 

 

But now you have a closer who throws a little faster, as a change, curve, split finger and is a good fielding pitcher. 

 

Again the first is okay and would be a closer on some teams but would be better suited to being a setup /long reliever.  But he wants the "aura" of being the closer, so you send him to another team that have far more issues so he can call himself a closer. 

 

It's like Rivera vs. Worrell.

295144[/snapback]

That analogy doesn't work for me. That analogy is like comparing Travis to Willis, and there is no comparison. Willis is much, much better, because Willis does virtually everything well, and Travis has trouble doing certain things well. But I wasn't and have never compared Travis favorably to Willis (since seeing McGahee in action of course). Willis is going to be or already is great. Travis has been good and often very good running the ball.

 

What I was saying is that you guys are ignoring the two MOST important factors (out of, say, 10), in a running back, being able to run for yards and scoring touchdowns, in favor of perhaps the 3rd and 5th and 12th and 1876th most important factors in a running back that make him a complete running back (like not fumbling, and pass blocking, and not being smart off the field, and how to conduct yourself at a gas station)