BillnutinHouston Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 OK, here's my thinking: 1) We draft Willis with a #1 pick. The obvious thinking there is that the guy, when healthy, will be an all-world talent. The main criticism of the pick is, we already have a solid RB. Donahoe, smarter than us, tells us that good teams need 2 quality backs over the course of a season. OK, I can buy that. 2) In the preseason, we were told that there are enough carries available in a game to make both Travis & Willis happy. The presumptions behind that statement are a) that Willis is ready to play (he's dressed & active, right?) and B) that he's good enough to take some carries away from Travis. 3) 3 games into the season, the Bills are 0-3 and Willis has amassed about 5 carries. Shows good instincts, a "downhill" style and a nose for the goal line (in the preseason at least, not given an opportunity in a real game.) In 2 of the 3 losses, Travis makes a critical "slip" or missed block, yet Willis remains on the sidelines. 4) This team is systematically progressing toward "achieving" the first overall pick in the draft, or at least a top 5 pick. Makes you feel some hope for the future until you remember that we don't have our #1 next year. We are handing the Cowboys a great #1 pick. Time out, Tom. When you defended the Willis pick you said teams need 2 good runners. We aren't winning yet, but we only use 1 runner even after he slips and/or misses assignments. Shall we conclude from this that Willis is truly NOT as good as you thought? If he is, then why isn't YOUR coach using him? Are you afraid that his play will only support the critics' skepticism that he was picked way too high after his injury? Since we do not have a first rounder next year (yet are desperately in need of one), how can we make the most of the few chips we have? I think we need to play Willis, and play him now. Let's see what we TRULY have with this guy and if he is decent then one of them needs to be moved. TD kept saying that good teams need 2 quality backs but we have proven that WE ONLY USE ONE. How can we be any worse off by trading one of them away for some other talent that we desperately need? I say that we need to trade a guy who sits on the sidelines for a player that actually gets on the field. A radical concept, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4everBills Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Any post with Tom, read this and comply at once deserves SERIOUS PROPS! LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 You make some valid points. At the risk of sounding silly, I believe that MM is willing to do whatever takes to get the best personnel on the field at any time. That said, I'm thinking that WM just isn't "there" yet. Having had knee surgery before, and granted, I wasn't in the conditioning that WM when he was hurt, but it still took me a good 3 years to be comfortable enough and trust it enough to play in a no-check hockey league. An NFL RB is probably more prone to having his knee twisting and stressing not just running, but in the tackles and pile-ups, especially if said player has a tender knee, than I ever would in a house B-league. Barring that, I don't know why we haven't seen more of Willis... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 Good post...well said. I'm still waiting for a lame excuse from One Bills Drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 You will comply We are The Borg, resistance is futile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts