Biggest contributor

[BoondckCL]

Another thing that i thought of was TD's devotion to running all of Butler's men out of town.

 

Think about it, Dave Campo in Dallas "Didn't win a super bowl with his own guys", and ever since people have been reluctant to keep players around from the old regimes.

 

If you think about it, with all of our superiority in the 90's, why is Eric Moulds the only player left on the roster from the Butler era? After the 1999 season, Buffalo should've been in great shape to make another run for the playoffs, then we had the 2000 draft which absolutely blew.

 

After the 2000 season, Buffalo absolutely cleaned house and brought in Donhaoe's and Greggggg's friends (Examples: Eddie Robinson and Lance Brown).

 

By the end of the 2002 season i think we only had 7 people from the Butler era on our team which included: Eric Moulds, Pat Williams, Bill Conaty, Ruben Brown, Sammy Morris, Antoine Winfield, and Peerless Price was booking for the free agent market.

 

The following season, we lost Winfield, Brown, Morris, and Conaty. We all know what kind of impact Winfield and Brown made, and why were they gone? Cause Donahoe and friends drove them out of town.

[Sisyphean Bills]

(Examples: Eddie Robinson and Lance Brown).

611120[/snapback]

 

Eddie Robinson. Man, he gets my vote. It's all that turtle-slow basstid's fault!

[BoondckCL]

Eddie Robinson.    Man, he gets my vote.  It's all that turtle-slow basstid's fault! 

611123[/snapback]

 

lol

[BoondckCL]

Sorry everybody, i made a mistake. It was not Dave Campo in Dallas it was Barry Switzer.

 

 

I Stupid

[jarthur31]

Bledsoe.

610191[/snapback]

 

LOL!

 

Once he was removed, things got ALOT worse ALOT quicker. Ask Lee Evans.

[Orton's Arm]

When TD came to Buffalo, the defense was well coached, while the offense was not. What he should have done was to bring in an offense-oriented coach who would leave the defense alone. Instead, all four of the final candidates were defensive guys.

 

When Gregg Williams was hired, it turned out his defensive system required a different kind of player than the 3-4. Some of Butler's players could play, just not in the Williams/Gray system.

 

Overall, TD's decision to find a defensive-minded head coach

- Did nothing to help the quality of the offensive coaching.

- Actually caused the quality of the defensive scheme to regress.

- Unnecessarily caused him to part with defensive talent Butler had acquired.

 

It wasn't until Mike Mularkey was hired that the Bills had a competent offensive line coach. Such a coach can implement his system, and point out players in the draft that seem to fit what he's looking for. But the lack of direction before McNally led to unfocused player selection, and ultimately, to poor results.

 

Then there was the issue of player character. In Pittsburgh, the scouting staff leaves no stone unturned to find out about a player's character. But based on the types of players TD often selected in Buffalo, I see no evidence that this system was transferred here. I just never got the sense that the Bills as a team were in the habit of wanting victory more than their opponents.

 

The bottom line is that TD made a number of decisions which may have seemed reasonable when viewed in isolation. But there was never any overarching theme inside of which these individual decisions could exist. We heard about how TD wanted to win by running the ball and winning with defense. In five years, he used three first-day picks on the QB position, three on WR, two on pass-catching TEs, two on RBs, and only two on the OL. TD was penny wise and pound foolish when it came to the Bills' best players, letting guys like Winfield, Jennings, and Pat Williams hit free agency instead of signing them to extensions.

 

TD didn't act like a man who had an overarching vision in his head, and who just needed time to implement it. Someone who sees in his mind what he wants to build knows which trade-offs to make, and when to make them. TD acted like someone who just wanted to improve a little here, or a little there, without really knowing how his actions in the present would get him to where he wanted to be. This was his downfall.

[kdharge]

The selection on Greg Williams when other coaches was available .........This led to a terrible staff that set us back for years ...........If only we chose the coach of cincinnati ...........things would have been different

[Chalkie Gerzowski]

Eddie Robinson.    Man, he gets my vote.  It's all that turtle-slow basstid's fault! 

611123[/snapback]

 

"How to fake out a linebacker", by Chad Fleet of Foot Pennington

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

The selection on Greg Williams when other coaches was available .........This led to a terrible staff that set us back for years ...........If only we chose the coach of cincinnati ...........things would have been different

611224[/snapback]

 

Ahh... GW... I have a set of oak "machinist tool boxes" near my computer... In one of the drawers I have the ticket stub from his first game as HC... You know the one with his mug plastered on it... Opening day 2001 v. the Saints.

 

I am saving it in mint condition... Does anybody know if it is worth something?

 

 

I am such a dreamer... I should have used it as kindling years ago!

[WVUFootball29]

This is an absurd statement. That 2002 offense sucked in the second half of the season after NE exposed Drew's O in Week 9. Why does everyone always forget that? Keeping Price would not have helped much. In fact, it would have made us worse because keeping him would have meant not getting the D help that we got in 2003.

 

This team took a step backward in 2003 because:

 

A. The offensive line was not addressed in the previous offseason.

B. Kevin Killdrive was calling the plays.

C. Drew Bledsoe was Drew Bledsoe.

 

To the original poster, aside from the obvious answer of TD or of either of his head coach choices, I'd say that Mike Williams was the biggest reason for our team's failures. A #4 overall choice always has big expectations to live up to, but as a lineman protecting our so-called "franchise QB's," it was bigger. Plus, the drafting of MW might have influenced TD into thinking that the OL didn't need much more help in future draft years.

610963[/snapback]

 

Yawn...another Bledose Fatalist

 

Think of it like this...who are you more likely to focus on as a defense? Price who caught over 1,000 yards or Josh Reed a second year guy moving over from the slot? Price kept the defenses honest where they couldnt just double cover Moulds every play because he could burn them. Reed has never been known for his blazing downfield speed. Killdrives passing offense was a vertical scheme, if you trade away the players that can get downfield, it pretty much makes this offense useless, which is exactly what happened and that is poor coaching to not adjust to the players in your system and poor management to trade away players that fit the offensive system and not bring in a replacement. Yes our line was horrid in 03, but the 02 line wasnt much better and we scored points. Yes we tapered off at the end, you would too if you were hit as many times as Bledsoe that year. But dont worry, Kelly Holcomb is here now and he'll save the day behind an even worse line because he knows how to throw the 3 yard out.

[Nanker]

plain and simple... Bruce Smith

 

If he had taken his damn flu shot back in the mid 90's. we would have won the playoff game in pittsburgh. Buffalo would have advanced to a 5th super bowl which we would have won. Also, the loss would have sent the steelers into a free fall, by which they fire TD earlier than they did. He then would have gotten picked up by another team before fatass split for SD. TD would have never been hired, and the bills would not be in this current mess. NE would not have been able to trade bledsoe, and he would have started in 2002 for NE, and they would have dealt Tom Brady to the Cardinals where his career would have perished, and he would be nothing more than a footnote.

 

Also, the SB win would have allowed Kelly to play for a year or 2 longer than he did, and we wouldnt have rushed to start todd collins. Today, we would be discussing Todd collins in the same sentence as Joe montana, after leading the Bills to 3 more SB wins, since he was given more time to develop under Jim Kelly.

 

Damn you Bruce Smith.

611097[/snapback]

 

Bravo Ramius! Bravo!

[Pyrite Gal]

When TD came to Buffalo, the defense was well coached, while the offense was not. What he should have done was to bring in an offense-oriented coach who would leave the defense alone. Instead, all four of the final candidates were defensive guys.

 

When Gregg Williams was hired, it turned out his defensive system required a different kind of player than the 3-4. Some of Butler's players could play, just not in the Williams/Gray system.

 

Overall, TD's decision to find a defensive-minded head coach

- Did nothing to help the quality of the offensive coaching.

- Actually caused the quality of the defensive scheme to regress.

- Unnecessarily caused him to part with defensive talent Butler had acquired.

 

It wasn't until Mike Mularkey was hired that the Bills had a competent offensive line coach. Such a coach can implement his system, and point out players in the draft that seem to fit what he's looking for. But the lack of direction before McNally led to unfocused player selection, and ultimately, to poor results.

 

Then there was the issue of player character. In Pittsburgh, the scouting staff leaves no stone unturned to find out about a player's character. But based on the types of players TD often selected in Buffalo, I see no evidence that this system was transferred here. I just never got the sense that the Bills as a team were in the habit of wanting victory more than their opponents.

 

The bottom line is that TD made a number of decisions which may have seemed reasonable when viewed in isolation. But there was never any overarching theme inside of which these individual decisions could exist. We heard about how TD wanted to win by running the ball and winning with defense. In five years, he used three first-day picks on the QB position, three on WR, two on pass-catching TEs, two on RBs, and only two on the OL. TD was penny wise and pound foolish when it came to the Bills' best players, letting guys like Winfield, Jennings, and Pat Williams hit free agency instead of signing them to extensions.

 

TD didn't act like a man who had an overarching vision in his head, and who just needed time to implement it. Someone who sees in his mind what he wants to build knows which trade-offs to make, and when to make them. TD acted like someone who just wanted to improve a little here, or a little there, without really knowing how his actions in the present would get him to where he wanted to be. This was his downfall.

611216[/snapback]

 

Huh? There are so many key facts missing from this description that it ends up as little more than revisionist history.

 

When TD came to town the key to all things regarding contracts was cap hell. The Bills had lived large and competed masterfully maintaining as much of the old guard as they could, but finally the grim reaper came calling and time waits for no man.

 

As TD had said in his website job prior to taking over the Bills. when someone asked who was a better performing QB, Flutie who had led this team to a couple of playoff berths or RJ who had suffered recurring injuries and left the one playoff game he started in the lead most important the team ended up losing anway by saying "What.s the qiestion."

 

Though even TD saw DF was the better QB (though neither was good enough) he had no choice but to cut the better player and keep the younger one with at least some potential of upside.

 

Add to this a series of other players such as Big Ted who simply had to be let go and it is no surprise that virtually all observers assess his first season as not one which fits your description, but of one where anyone gets a mulligan for the record achieved.

 

Does this mean TD made good choices when he came here?

 

No and yes.

 

Yes, I think he made some generally necessary and even some good choices in his first year as far as player selection and negotiating goes. Many of the folks cut such as DF or Big Ted were simply better players than the ones we kept. However, TD made the move we were forced to make unless we wanted to lock ourselves into perpetual losing status.

 

Further, he made some very good moves such as his work leading his first Bills draft. Trading down the first pick and still getting the 1st CB taken in Pro Bowler Clements and getting an extra pick turned into Pro Bowler Henry was simply a nice piece of work. As with any draft there were some clinkers for example the Ron Edwards pick has not worked out as a Bills fan would want, however, other picks such as Schobel have worked out quite well for us.

 

I think he deserves good marks for the work he did ending cap hell a year (or more) quicker than most experts predicted and also high marks on both the immediate (2 eventual Pro Bowlers and several starters on our bad team from his 7 rounds of picka) and the long-term impacts of this draft (3 players still on team from the 7 rounds).

 

I think all of this is caneled out however by the horrible decisions he made in hiring gW as an HC. You are correct that the decision to switch to a 4-3 from a 3-4 at the same time as we were losing DL starters and reserve who left for a big contract (Hansen, Big Ted, Wiley and Bruce) in a rwo year period. However it is simply revisionist history not to recognize that amidst the fatal stupid errors TD made in HC hiring there were also some very good moves.

[Orton's Arm]

I think all of this is caneled out however by the horrible decisions he made in hiring gW as an HC.  You are correct that the decision to switch to a 4-3 from a 3-4 at the same time as we were losing DL starters and reserve who left for a big contract (Hansen, Big Ted, Wiley and Bruce) in a rwo year period.  However it is simply revisionist history not to recognize that amidst the fatal stupid errors TD made in HC hiring there were also some very good moves.

611262[/snapback]

FYI: "revisionist" is considered a descriptive (as opposed to negative) term among historians. For instance, American historians had traditionally had a negative view of the Japan that existed centuries ago. This view was colored by Pearl Harbor. But the revisionist view is that the Japan of centuries ago had many more positive qualities than had been acknowledged. Any non-traditional view of any period of anyone's history is by definition revisionist.

 

Now to address your points. I agree the Bills were in the middle of a salary cap mess when TD arrived. Since they were in rebuilding mode too, it made sense to cut older, expensive players. Guys like Fina and Flutie.

 

But you try to hang onto your younger players, so that when you emerge from the salary cap mess, you still have some core left from the previous GM. Take the Travis Henry pick. The Bills had Antowain Smith, a player who is still in the league. Why use a 2nd round pick trying to upgrade Smith when you don't have an offensive line?

 

From the point of view of finding player talent, the 2001 draft was arguably TD's best. Let's look at what's happened to the four best players TD found in 2001:

 

- Nate Clements: franchised, long-term status uncertain.

- Jonas Jennings: allowed to hit free agency after just four years.

- Travis Henry: made expendable by the McGahee pick, traded away when nobody wanted a RB.

- Aaron Schobel: locked up to a long-term deal.

 

With just one of his four best 2001 draft picks locked up to a long-term deal, TD didn't do a very good job retaining the value he'd created. Even the fact the Bills got a 3rd round pick for Travis Henry had more to do with Henry needing money (and hence signing a one year extension) than with any big picture strategy on TD's part.

 

TD did an even worse job retaining the value Butler had found, as I mentioned earlier. You can blame a lot of that on the salary cap mess, and rightly so. But not all of it. Butler was probably no better of a talent evaluator than TD. But Butler did a better job of keeping the players he'd found, and keeping the coaching staff intact. These two sources of continuity allowed Butler to build up the team, and to get into the playoffs despite the occassional Butler mistake.

[Sisyphean Bills]

FYI: "revisionist" is considered a descriptive (as opposed to negative) term among historians. For instance, American historians had traditionally had a negative view of the Japan that existed centuries ago. This view was colored by Pearl Harbor. But the revisionist view is that the Japan of centuries ago had many more positive qualities than had been acknowledged. Any non-traditional view of any period of anyone's history is by definition revisionist.

611325[/snapback]

 

I think he means the term "revisionist" in the same way that Holocaust deniers proudly proclaimed themselves to be "revisionist historians" circa the 1970s. The term can and is used in a perjorative sense: the falsification of historical events, either deliberately or by repeating the falsehoods of others.

[sfladave]

plain and simple... Bruce Smith

 

If he had taken his damn flu shot back in the mid 90's. we would have won the playoff game in pittsburgh. Buffalo would have advanced to a 5th super bowl which we would have won. Also, the loss would have sent the steelers into a free fall, by which they fire TD earlier than they did. He then would have gotten picked up by another team before fatass split for SD. TD would have never been hired, and the bills would not be in this current mess. NE would not have been able to trade bledsoe, and he would have started in 2002 for NE, and they would have dealt Tom Brady to the Cardinals where his career would have perished, and he would be nothing more than a footnote.

 

Also, the SB win would have allowed Kelly to play for a year or 2 longer than he did, and we wouldnt have rushed to start todd collins. Today, we would be discussing Todd collins in the same sentence as Joe montana, after leading the Bills to 3 more SB wins, since he was given more time to develop under Jim Kelly.

 

Damn you Bruce Smith.

611097[/snapback]

The butterfly effect!

[Orton's Arm]

I think he means the term "revisionist" in the same way that Holocaust deniers proudly proclaimed themselves to be "revisionist historians" circa the 1970s.  The term can and is used in a perjorative sense: the falsification of historical events, either deliberately or by repeating the falsehoods of others.

611342[/snapback]

I know what he meant--revising for the purpose of promoting a dishonest or inaccurate point of view. But revisionist historians of, say, pre-1066 England will tell you that they're adopting a revised view of things merely because their interpretation of things is different than the one traditionally accepted. In some cases the traditional view will be correct, in some the revisionist view will be correct, and maybe sometimes they'll both be wrong.

 

Using the term "revisionist" in the pejorative sense is unfair to many honest historians. It's just so broad a term. Yes, it encompasses those who deny Nazi Germany gassed the Jews. It also encompasses Marxists historians who claim the Puritans came to America "for cod not God." And it encompasses many historians between these two extremes. They're all lumped together under the "revisionist" label, so equating this label with dishonesty throws the baby out with the bathwater.

[Typical TBD Guy]

Yes our line was horrid in 03, but the 02 line wasnt much better and we scored points.  Yes we tapered off at the end, you would too if you were hit as many times as Bledsoe that year.  But dont worry, Kelly Holcomb is here now and he'll save the day behind an even worse line because he knows how to throw the 3 yard out.

611236[/snapback]

 

Huh?

 

Before you were arguing that keeping Price was critical to maintaining steady progress in 2003.

 

And now, you're acknowledging that the 2002 offense tapered off because the OL sucked.

 

So how were we ever going to keep Price (at market value circa March 2003) AND fix the OL at the same time AND keep Bledsoe, whom you speak so highly of? Plus, there's the tiny issue of the 2002 defense that needed fixing...all of this within the restrictions of a salary cap.

 

In case you're not keeping track, my opinion is that the right player personnel solution in March 2003 was to:

 

A. Dump Bledsoe

B. Let Price go like we did.

C. Fix the OL

D. Fix the defense mostly to the extent that we did in 2003.

 

PS: I'm not a Holcomb fan either, so I don't know where that attack came from...

[The Dean]

I think he means the term "revisionist" in the same way that Holocaust deniers proudly proclaimed themselves to be "revisionist historians" circa the 1970s.  The term can and is used in a perjorative sense: the falsification of historical events, either deliberately or by repeating the falsehoods of others.

611342[/snapback]

 

 

Expecting the ARM to attempt to interpret something the way the poster meant it, and to actually consider it through his biases, is expecting FAR too much, I'm afraid. He would rather sidetrack the discussion in an attempt to get a "win" instead of dealing with an honest give-and-take. It's his MO.

[Orton's Arm]

Expecting the ARM to attempt to interpret something the way the poster meant it, and to actually consider it through his biases, is expecting FAR too much, I'm afraid.  He would rather sidetrack the discussion in an attempt to get a "win" instead of dealing with an honest give-and-take.  It's his MO.

611566[/snapback]

Expecting the Dean to attempt to look at any of my posts through an honest lens, and to actually consider that I might be trying to share a little knowledge, is expecting FAR too much, I'm afraid. He would rather sidetrack the discussion in an attempt to deliver a cheap shot instead of engaging in an honest exchange of information. It's his MO.

[The Senator]

Oh come'on, ARM - can't you do any better than that?

 

How 'bout, "I know you are, but what am I?"