I've never understood this anti TD movement

[Orton's Arm]

Hey, JDG--I think you slipped up here.  Peerless Price was not drafted in 1999 by Butler.  He was drafted by Donohoe a couple of years later.

 

Do you mean Pierson Priealou? (sp?)

497120[/snapback]

JDG is correct. Peerless Price was drafted by Butler. I distinctly remember Rob Johnson completing a key pass to him in that playoff game against Tennessee.

[Dr. K]

Actually he was drafted by Butler in '99.

 

Prioleau was a FA signing from SF.

497125[/snapback]

 

 

I stand corrected.

[Tortured Soul]

1) Donahoe changes his mind too much, pulls the trigger too quickly, and never lets things get built.  Prima facie evidence of this is that the Bills last one in Foxboro in 2000 - just five years ago, and only *one* player is still with the Bills from that team.  Just *one*!  (Eric Moulds)  Football is a *team* game, and no wonder a team has not been built with that kind of turnover. 

496947[/snapback]

Don't be too high on that game. Remember, it was a win over Bledsoe.

I think you have to add to the list of Butler's good moves Bryce Fisher, who has 7 sacks in eight games. I don't even remember why Donahoe let him walk after three sacks in spot duty in 01, just in time for his binge on 2nd round DE's.

[JDG]

Don't be too high on that game.  Remember, it was a win over Bledsoe.

I think you have to add to the list of Butler's good moves Bryce Fisher, who has 7 sacks in eight games.  I don't even remember why Donahoe let him walk after three sacks in spot duty in 01, just in time for his binge on 2nd round DE's.

497149[/snapback]

 

The point being not that it was a great win five years ago, but that it seems pretty extraordinary to me for an NFL team to turn over basically its whole roster in five years.

 

I definitely wish we still had Bryce Fisher, but in fairness to Donahoe, I think that St. Louis let him walk too before he finally busted out....

 

JDG

[plenzmd1]

Simon,

 

I agree that the 2000 draft was an unmitigated disaster, but I think that you are being just a little too hard on Butler.  In particular, I think that the 1999 and 1996 drafts were good, and 1997 was probably fine as well.  To make my point, lets consider 1999:

 

JDG

497116[/snapback]

 

Nice post JDG(of course it agrees with me)so its gotta be right

 

My only point was we take for granted that TD had to start from scratch in salary cap hell, and to me the team he inherited was better than any team we have seen under whiteys direction.

 

I've said it before, I'll say it again.I'll take a little salary cap hell if he can just deliver the Bills back to the playoffs. Under the cap is great, but only if your winning while under the cap.

[1959BillsFan]

Just look at the club, extremely mediocre. That is how I would classify TD's "leadership" and management performance as a GM and President, extremely mediocre.

 

He definitely not that same level as Pioli or

 

Rich McKay

Ozzie Newsome

Andy Reid

 

TD is neither the likes of Matt Millan

[Orton's Arm]

Nice post JDG(of course it agrees with me)so its gotta be right

 

My only point was we take for granted that TD had to start from scratch in salary cap hell, and to me the team he inherited was better than any team we have seen under whiteys direction.

497179[/snapback]

It depends on how you look at it. Yes, the 2000 Bills were a special teams tackle away from a playoff win against a team that ultimately lost the Super Bowl. But like the waning years of the Kelly era, the success of the 2000 season was largely based on aging players.

 

One of the main reasons for Butler's success was continuity. Wade Philips was the defensive coordinator or head coach for Butler's entire tenure, thus ensuring that players could be selected for one particular defensive system. John Fina spent basically his whole career with the Bills. Because of continuity and good defensive coaching--two things Donahoe's teams have lacked--Butler's teams were greater than the sum of their parts.

 

But continuity can only get you so far when your players are over the hill. There wasn't a strong group of younger guys to step in and take the place of those who were retiring. There was little or no young talent on the offensive line, there was nothing as far as the starting QB, only a stopgap RB, no young talent at TE, and the defense was getting old. Aging players like John Fina had been paid far more than they were worth. It was a bad situation no matter how you slice it.

 

Donahoe did the right thing by getting rid of anyone who was old and expensive. But he made his own situation worse than it needed to be by bringing in a defensive head coach. The switch to the new scheme helped squeeze out some of the younger defensive players Butler had found; players who went on to have success elsewhere. Yes, the cleanup had to be done, and yes, it had to be painful. But had Donahoe been less heavy-handed, there would be more than one Butler player on the roster today. And the Bills would be a stronger team.

[bill in Livonia]

You seem to have a selective memory. The team when tom took over was better than the team is at present. Admittedly we had a serious salry cap problem

but Tom has not made many good decisions since he took over. He has demenstrated that he can run a team on the cheap. He has not demenstrated an ability for picking personell either coaching or players. He has demenstrated a propensity for hiring anyone with a past Pittsburgh connection. He had a media reputation as a real pro football General Manager. The past five years have have shown that that "rep" was not accurate. He has spun and BS'ed us for four of the last five years untill we no longer have faith in his veracity. I for one am sick of football on the cheap. I would hate to see another coaching change but I would welcome a General Manager change. I suppose nobody would want a GM job if he had to have the former guys personell. So, that is our conundrum. Donohoe could change his direction and draft better prospects. He could be more active and generous in the free agent market. Do you see that happening?.....................................Hummn me either,

Bill

GO BILLS!!

CRUSH KANSAS CITY!!

[Orton's Arm]

You seem to have a selective memory. The team when tom took over was better than the team is at present.

Not sure who this is addressed to, but I agree the Bills in 2000 achieved more than any of TD's teams have. But that team had basically peaked, and was on the decline.

He has not demenstrated an ability for picking personell either coaching or players.

I disagree. The Bills played with a lot of heart this past week in NE; the sign of a good head coach. The position coaches Mularkey has chosen are excellent. Jim McNally is the very offensive line coach many or most posters on this board had been dreaming of, and is hands-down better than any offensive line coach in recent Bills history. The receivers coach is the same guy who coached Anquan Boldin to his 1000 yard rookie season. The QB coach is Sam Wyche--a former head coach. While the jury is still out on Tom Clements, clearly Mularkey's offensive position coaches are part of the solution to the Bills' problems. The same could be said about Mularkey himself.

He has demenstrated a propensity for hiring anyone with a past Pittsburgh connection.

Look at TD's Pittsburgh hires: Tom Modrack, Dick LeBeau, Mike Mularkey. Compare them to his non-Pittsburgh hires: Gregg Williams, Jerry Gray, Kevin Gilbride, Mike Shepherd. TD would have done well to have hired only Pittsburgh people.

 

I would hate to see another coaching change but I would welcome a General Manager change.

You and me both, though I would welcome a new defensive coordinator.

[JDG]

A couple quick replies to various posters:

 

1) Sorry to disagree with plenzmd1 after the nice compliment, but given the choice, I would pick 5-straight 10-6 playoff birth years, over one 14-2 year with a Super Bowl win and two 10-6 years, and two 4-12 years. Especially given the situation of our franchise, the former would probably keep the Bills in Buffalo - but definitely am not sure it would survive a prolonged a downturn at the wrong moment.

 

2) To Bill in Livonia - the Bills have *not* been run on the cheap. Cheap times don't sign a tagged Takeo Spikes away, cheap teams don't trade for Bledsoe and then jettison him after just two years. There are many valid criticisms of Donahoe (see my post above), but running the team on the cheap is not one of them.

 

3) To Holcomb's Arm - In my tally, Gilbride counts as a "Donahoe Pittsburgh Hire".... Gilbride was in Pittsburgh during Donahoe's tenure, and I honestly don't think that Gregg Williams fired his hand-picked offensive coordinator (remember all the Lists he had during the job interview?) after one talent-deprived 3-13 season. Given the unrealistic expectations Donahoe set for that team, however, I can easily imagine Donahoe having done so.

 

JDG

[Simon]

In particular, I think that the 1999 and 1996 drafts were good, and 1997 was probably fine as well. To make my point, lets consider 1999:

I'd agree that '99 was the best of the 5 years, but beig the best of a bad bunch does not qualify it as good. Winfield was the right pick in the first round but after that it was poor. Wasting a 2ndrounder on Peerless who had one average year and has been horrible in every other doesn not qualify as good. His 3rdrounder has bounced around and is hanging on as a back-up. Over the next 6 picks Newman is the only player even worth mentioning. And while I liked his last pick, he still wasn't even eligible for another couple seasons.

That's one real good player with 10 picks to play with, that coming in the first round and then no picks worth their value until taking an inelligible guy with a lastround supplemental pick. And this was his best draft of a 5 year stretch! An impossible way to succesfully run an NFL team in the salary cap era.

As for your assertation that the Packers' draft record looks "fairly comparable", I'm sorry John but that's utterly insane. You only have to go 2/3rd's of the way into the first GreenBay draft you listed to find more good NFL players than Butler's Bills drafted in 5 whole years.

 

 

I'll get to various other folks' solid replies(hopefully) when mine eyes aren't closing of their own accord.

[Orton's Arm]

3) To Holcomb's Arm - In my tally, Gilbride counts as a "Donahoe Pittsburgh Hire"....  Gilbride was in Pittsburgh during Donahoe's tenure, and I honestly don't think that Gregg Williams fired his hand-picked offensive coordinator (remember all the Lists he had during the job interview?) after one talent-deprived 3-13 season.  Given the unrealistic expectations Donahoe set for that team, however, I can easily imagine Donahoe having done so.

 

JDG

497445[/snapback]

You may be right, though I would find it odd that TD would force a coordinator--and especially a coordinator like THAT--onto a head coach. Maybe the Mike Shepherd firing was encouraged or forced by TD. However, I think that Gilbride and Gregg Williams were with the Houston/Tennessee franchise at the same time. If I had to guess, I'd say the resulting familiarity between Williams and Gilbride was the main factor in the latter's hiring.

[ndirish1978]

"I know full well that we haven't been to the playoffs since he arrived"

 

Screw the rest, this is all that matters. Bold moves havent done jack for us so far have they. Bengals turned it around in 3 years. No excuse.

[Fan in Chicago]

Bengals turned it around in 3 years. No excuse.

497628[/snapback]

 

Counting from which year ? While I am slowly beginning to agree that TD may have made some critical mistakes, giving the Bengals as an example is not appropriate.

[plenzmd1]

JDG

497445[/snapback]

 

Sorry to disagree with plenzmd1.

This not allowed

 

2) To Bill in Livonia - the Bills have *not* been run on the cheap.   Cheap times don't sign a tagged Takeo Spikes away, cheap teams don't trade for Bledsoe and then jettison him after just two years.   There are many valid criticisms of Donahoe (see my post above), but running the team on the cheap is not one of them. 

 

I agree with this. I am not a cap guru, but every body keeps insisting we are in good shape relative to the cap. I just do not see it. We have a 3-5 team, with an aging D, and I am still looking for how we have any cap space next year. Just because we haven't had to cut people for being over the cap, doesn't mean we are managing the cap well. Seemed like most teams manage the cap better now, as very few June 1 cuts. Like I said earlier, being under the cap(i think we are two million now)but losing , so what? The friggen Cardinals mangage the cap great, who cares?

 

 

 

However, I will say this. I have siad in earlier posts I do not mind mistakes being made, just have the guts to admit them. The move of big Mike and benching of Fat Bennie(if it happens) is at least a start in that process. I will give props to TD and MM for having the guts to do that.