Bill from NYC Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 He drafted good and bad players. Just like nearly every other GM in the league. The draft is, believe it or not, rather a crap shoot. I think a better judgement of him would be: what did he do in free agency? 792986[/snapback] I disagree Tom. Certain teams have WAY more money to spend on free agents than do others. TD, as the GM of a small market team with a relatively "poor" owner (compared to teams such as the Seahawks, Redskins, etc.) was able to somehow sign London Fletcher and TKO. These guys are great players imo. To his credit, he also brought in Peters. WRT the draft, TD was able to get good players in late rounds, especially in 2003. The draft, especially for small market teams such as the Bills, Steelers, Bengals, etc., is THE way to build NFL Football teams. Good GMs select good players. It really is that simple imo. TD screwed up by letting his ego get in the way of reason. I truly believe that he made unorthodox moves (Mike Williams, Roscoe Parrish, etc.) to prove how smart he was. He also hired sub-par coaches, probably due to insecurity. Most of all, just like Mr. Butler and perhaps Marv (we will see next year), he neglected the offensive line. There are numerous posts each day about JP's progress. Do you think he would be doing any better at all with a stud LT and a stud OG? I for one do. TD chose to fill these crucial spots with late round picks, scrap heap bums, and a fat, 40 million dollar RT. I don't recall any team winning that was built this way. Do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted October 2, 2006 Author Share Posted October 2, 2006 That's because the Vikings lowballed him by offering him LESS than some players taken after him in the draft. All McKinnie wanted was to be slotted and the inept Vikings front office was trying to lowball him. Recall that signabilty was also an issue. Some scouts felt that BM was the best player coming out of the draft and, thus, BM made it clear that he wanted to be paid as such. Let's not forget that he sat out most of the 2002 season with the Vikings threatening to go back into the 2003 draft. 793033[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 I disagree Tom. With what, my conjecture that free agency is a better measure of a GM than the draft? Because that's all I said. I didn't say that Donahoe was lousy in the FA market, just that his performance in the market would be a better measure of him. And I didn't see where your post spoke to that conjecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 That's because the Vikings lowballed him by offering him LESS than some players taken after him in the draft. All McKinnie wanted was to be slotted and the inept Vikings front office was trying to lowball him. 793083[/snapback] I think it was an unfortunate timing. The guy who owned the Vikes, Redcomb was trying to sell the team and did not want to pay a BIG signing bonus, which is to be paid right away. He was trying to maximize his profit as he would have been responsible for that entire signing bonus (which was in the 10M region). Hence the Vikes were trying to low ball by trying to give him a two-tiered bonus whereby the new owner would have had to take the responsibilty for the 2nd bonus. McKinne took a stand and rejected such a contract and hence the hold out. However, since McKinnie was from the U, he got a pretty bad rap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 I still wonder why, when every college broadcaster and college writer was proclaiming McKinne the next great OT, the draftniks ended up evaluating MW higher. A case of overthinking perhaps? I thought I rememebred there was also the possibility of some "character" issues as well. Wasn't McKinnie arrested in a bar scrap sometime prior to the draft? While on the other hand BigMike was viewed as a fine young man who loved his momma and was deferential to his elders. Unfortunately it appears he may have also been a bit deferential to his opponents and his own body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 I thought I rememebred there was also the possibility of some "character" issues as well. Wasn't McKinnie arrested in a bar scrap sometime prior to the draft? While on the other hand BigMike was viewed as a fine young man who loved his momma and was deferential to his elders. Unfortunately it appears he may have also been a bit deferential to his opponents and his own body. 793121[/snapback] It was a bad pick Simon. MW was fat, had a history of injuries, and he played RT. These guys are just not taken at #4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 MW was fat, They're all fat. And scouting reports prior to the draft claimed that he worked hard in the weight room. had a history of injuries He actually played in every single game of his entire 4year stint at Texas. and he played RT. I don't think that's an issue. He and McKinnie were very similar players so the Bills apparently took a shot at the one who seemed to be a better citizen. It was a bad pick Simon. Saying it was a bad pick in hindsight is easy. At the time it didn't seem like an unreasonable pick to anybody. NFL.com's career notes on BigMike prior to the draft: "Physical, athletic and intelligent lineman who developed into one of the nation's premier offensive tackles in 2001 … Dominating blocker who is unbelievably light on his feet for his size … "The sky's the limit for Mike and he has a chance to be one of the great ones," offensive coordinator Greg Davis said … Moved into the starting lineup at right tackle in the later part of his sophomore year … Has allowed only two quarterback sacks in 28 career starts." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 At the time it didn't seem like an unreasonable pick to anybody. 793176[/snapback] Some of us actually called for McKinnie, who was by FAR and away the more visible and dominant OL at the collegiate level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Some of us actually called for McKinnie, who was by FAR and away the more visible and dominant OL at the collegiate level. 793186[/snapback] So was Tony Mandarich. Big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 http://proxy.espn.go.com/nfl/lastcall?page=lastcall/week4 • For all the criticism that former Buffalo general manager Tom Donahoe still takes, the fact remains that he drafted the Bills' starting quarterback, J.P. Losman, who is playing well, a franchise-level tailback in Willis McGahee and a deep-threat receiver in Lee Evans. 792397[/snapback] What Pasquarelli needs to accept is that Donahoe blew his chance in Buffalo with his horrible coaching hires, plain and simple. Personnel wasn't the key issue, it was losing brought about by bad coaching. If he hires John Fox, Marvin Lewis or Charlie Weiss instead of GW and Mularkey he would likely still be here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts