stuckincincy Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 FWIW, there have been 4 expansion teams added since 1995...CAR, JAX, CLE, and HOU. So there is more competition for the better players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Story? 836741[/snapback] Back then, the friction between Polian and Jeff Littman (treasurer of Wilson Industries) was no secret. As the story goes: Wolford's contract expired following the 1992 season. Polian was prepared to re-sign Wolford to an extension during the prior off-season, even though the pricetag was going to be substantial. Littman refused to okay the deal, Ralph (as usual) sided with Littman, and Polian went thermonuclear. As mentioned in Marv's biography, the decision to part company was actually made before that season, but kept quiet until after the Super Bowl. So instead of keeping an already-signed WW in Buffalo, brand-new GM John Butler was faced with the decision of either naming him a 'franchise' player, a 'right-of-first-refusal' player, or letting him walk as an unrestricted FA. With contract talks for Thurman and Bruuuce looming in the near future, he used the first-refusal option instead of the franchise tag on Wolford, and it came back to bite us when the Colts devised their poison-pill escalator clause. Thanks, Jeff -- you cost us Wolford AND Polian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 I believe that is the Raiders approach... Grove Gallery, etc. It has worked well for them as we can see. Few years ago it worked well with the Cardinals as well. Len Davis, Anthony Clement, Pete Kendall, etc. There's a delicate balance that needs to be reached for a team to play well. You can't emphasize or over emphasize any one area of the team... lest the others regress. Donahoe dug such a hole for this team, it will take Jauron at least two more years just to get to a position where it can be in serious playoff contention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Meadows started most of the Colts' games from 1997-2002; Indy's cumulative regular-season record in those years was 45-51. He was in and out of the lineup with various injuries in '03, and out of football after that season (before attempting a comeback with Denver this year). 836324[/snapback] The only part that I regret about this conversation is that it is being held in Lot 1/Pole 5. I think that the cumulative record stat while true, is partially flawed, or at lest explainable to some degree. ........ In 1997, the Colts drafted and started 2 rookie OTs. They both needed time to learn the game, etc. They finished 3-13. In 1998, they drafted Peyton Manning. Their record was 3-13. In 1999, with bookend OTs and a #1 qb, they finished 13-3. Throwing out 97, 98, and even 03 because of injuries to Meadows (a 12-4 season), I show them playing at a record of 39-25 in seasons that include 99 - 02. I agree that Polian didn't focus on OL as much as did other successful GMs. I am floating out the proposition that perhaps he didn't need to do so with players such as Wolford, Glenn, and a pre-injury Meadows on his team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 No, but your avatar probably could (was that the guy on the YouTube video?)! As for AD's topic, I think it has a lot of validity simply for the reason that I plan on bringing up like a broken record: something is wrong with the Buffalo Bills' OL scouting staff. This problem has continued through 3 GM's and 4 head coaches and God knows how many offensive coordinators and OL coaches....none of the linemen we're drafted since Ruben Brown seem to have had success here or anywhere else in the NFL (Jennings is always injured in SF). Simply drafting lots of OL isn't going to solve everything. And until the scouting staff changes and until we finally figure out what identity our offense will be (and stick with it), I'd rather see us draft "best player available" than constantly reaching for linemen. There are just too many roster holes to not do so... 835629[/snapback] Our OL in general have shown to be below average in intelligence and the ability to process blitz pickups and line adjustments (not to mention remembering the sanp count). It may,or may not be a coincidence, due to the lack of high motor guys on the OL. The big dumb guys can run block, but can't figure out who to block in pass protection. Bills need to get smarter OL men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 The only part that I regret about this conversation is that it is being held in Lot 1/Pole 5. I think that the cumulative record stat while true, is partially flawed, or at lest explainable to some degree. ........ In 1997, the Colts drafted and started 2 rookie OTs. They both needed time to learn the game, etc. They finished 3-13. In 1998, they drafted Peyton Manning. Their record was 3-13. In 1999, with bookend OTs and a #1 qb, they finished 13-3. Throwing out 97, 98, and even 03 because of injuries to Meadows (a 12-4 season), I show them playing at a record of 39-25 in seasons that include 99 - 02. I agree that Polian didn't focus on OL as much as did other successful GMs. I am floating out the proposition that perhaps he didn't need to do so with players such as Wolford, Glenn, and a pre-injury Meadows on his team. 836847[/snapback] Personally, I would almost always draft an OL on day 1. Even if I have a good OL already, in this day and age of FA and the constant spectre of injury, it's an area that I always want to be strong. The B'gals have been decimated with injuries on offense and defense this season, but after a game or so of line shuffling, their 2nd rounder, Andrew Whitworth - LSU (heir apparent to Steinbach) has settled into the LT spot in place of the injured Levi Jones, and is performing well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasker Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 I think most of what I'm going to say has been said already in this thread, but I want to agree with those who have said it and summerize what I think: 1) The #1 weakness on our team is our O-Line, which is one of the most important components of a winning team 2) There is no perfect script to building an O-Line, but what matters is the results - getting talented players who play well both individually and as a unit. The reason that Gallery is not a fix in Oakland and Mike Williams was not a fix in Buffalo is because they are not great football players NOT because they were high picks. Taking Orlando Pace early is a great move, taking Mike Williams early is not. Taking Petyon Manning early is a great move, taking Ryan Leaf early is not. I think upon closer study there might be some evidence (which I will not try to present here, I just think you MIGHT be able to make a case) that certain positions like O-Line are easier to get value on later in the draft, but the absolute most crucial thing is to get value, to get good players. Our attempts this off season were to focus on the D with our high draft picks and bigger free agent signings (Triplett and draft day 1), and on the O-Line with smaller deals and day 2 (Reyes, Fowler, Pennington, Butler) and largely ignore skill positions (I think a good move all things considered). I don't think that is a flawed strategy fundamentally and we should have flipped it around. But I do think we are not getting enough benefits from our line moves yet. Reyes isn't good enough to keep an out of position Gandy on the bench, Fowler is only okay, Pennington is an unknown, and Butler has played sparingly. Whether they come from high draft picks, low draft picks, trades, or free agents, the key is to get great players and coach them well. Sounds simple, but whoever is best at evaluating the options and doing the actual coaching is going to end up with advantage. My hope is that our young tackles can develop into excellent players (but if Pennington is not the guy we need to decide and replace him as well), we replace the guards with the best options available, and we wait and see with at center if there is room for improvement, or if Fowler is our best choice for now to add some stability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Thanks, Jeff -- you cost us Wolford AND Polian. Hey Jeff, up yours!! Lori, thanks for the color in that story. I read Marv's bio, and knew about the poison pill on the Wolford contract etc. But the color you provide with respect to the relationship between Littman & Polian is invaluable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Back then, the friction between Polian and Jeff Littman (treasurer of Wilson Industries) was no secret. As the story goes: Wolford's contract expired following the 1992 season. Polian was prepared to re-sign Wolford to an extension during the prior off-season, even though the pricetag was going to be substantial. Littman refused to okay the deal, Ralph (as usual) sided with Littman, and Polian went thermonuclear. As mentioned in Marv's biography, the decision to part company was actually made before that season, but kept quiet until after the Super Bowl. So instead of keeping an already-signed WW in Buffalo, brand-new GM John Butler was faced with the decision of either naming him a 'franchise' player, a 'right-of-first-refusal' player, or letting him walk as an unrestricted FA. With contract talks for Thurman and Bruuuce looming in the near future, he used the first-refusal option instead of the franchise tag on Wolford, and it came back to bite us when the Colts devised their poison-pill escalator clause. Thanks, Jeff -- you cost us Wolford AND Polian. 836784[/snapback] thanks, lori. I didn't know about the wolford/littman/polian dispute. it all makes sense now ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 More depth on Polian/Littman (sorry for the threadjack, AD)... Many of you will remember Doug Young from his days on WGR, but he was also writing for Shout! during that period. Here's his column lamenting Polian's departure; reading it now, thirteen years later, he was dead on: As The Bills Turn: Breaking Up Is Hard To DoThey're breaking up that old gang of mine at One Bills Drive. Just four days after Buffalo's third consecutive Super Bowl loss, Bill Polian's head was lopped off after quite a run with the Bills. Since taking over as general manager in 1986, all Bill Polian did was rebuild a dipsy-dumpster of a football team into the most successful franchise in the NFL. No easy task. But to Bills insiders, the firing of Polian was no surprise. Indeed, his departure had been blowing in the wind before the season even started. What was Polian's downfall? Losing to the Cowboys? A falling out with Ralph Wilson? Not quite. Apparently, there was a battle of the Bills' bills between team treasurer Jeff Littman and Polian. To say the two didn't get along would be an understatement. They disliked each other with a passion. Polian's drive to build the Bills into a winner required too much money for Littman's taste, plain and simple. And when push came to shove, Wilson sided with his guy in the Motor City and left Polian out in the cold. I come to praise Bill Polian, not to bury him as did Ralph. He is arguably the best general manager in football. Yes, he's a hothead whose wrath I have felt personally at times during his television show -- and I'm not alone in that category! But while his temper may have gotten the best of him at times, the bottom line is that Polian was and is a winner. And he'll continue to be a winner when he is hired by another team. Polian is currently assisting Paul Tagliabue in the NFL front office as Bill was the architect of the league's unrestricted free agency system now in place, which appears to be working like a charm. Did the Bills drop the ball when they fired Bill Polian? Realistically, he created such a football machine during his time in Buffalo that the Bills will survive, and perhaps thrive, despite his absence. Many were surprised that it was Polian who got the axe and not Marv Levy, whose staff also remains intact. But being the warrior that he is, Levy knows you can't look back in this game. As long as he is given the opportunity, Levy will do what he does best -- coach. In the meantime, Bill Polian has left a legacy his successor will be lucky to duplicate. I wish him nothing but the best because he is the best. The Bills should have kept him. --Shout! Vol. III, No. 6, May 1993 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 To summarize, some of that line (Wolford/Ritcher) came from early round picks. But mostly it was based on 11th round draft picks and street free agents and the like. I wonder why the Bills were so much more successful with late round OL picks and street free agents back then, than they've been recently? One possible explanation is that back then, they emphasized mental traits such as work ethic, toughness, intelligence, that sort of thing. But maybe a guy like TD placed more emphasis on athletic ability, and less on that other stuff. I don't know. 836743[/snapback] Defenses are even more sophisticated now and losing guys to free agency didn't occur so quickly back then either. Continuity was a lot more possible in the pre-free agency NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 The reason that Gallery is not a fix in Oakland and Mike Williams was not a fix in Buffalo is because they are not great football players NOT because they were high picks. 836891[/snapback] Mike Wiliams may have turned out to be a bust no matter what. But, there's also some possibility that if he had had consistent coaching (i.e. not a revolving door at the OL position or in terms of running different offenses), he just may have worked out, at least better than he did. Think about if he had one coach who he connected with constantly pushing him... The same thing is happening to Gallery in Oakland. These guys may not have the mental toughness for the NFL, or that toughness just might have been exhausted by virtue of the fact that they could never get untracked, that nothing ever clicked in the crucial first few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 More depth on Polian/Littman (sorry for the threadjack, AD)... Many of you will remember Doug Young from his days on WGR, but he was also writing for Shout! during that period. Here's his column lamenting Polian's departure; reading it now, thirteen years later, he was dead on: Jeff Littman, destroyer of the Bills. Wonderful. I hope this clown has no role with the Bills now. I hope you are happy you saved a few measly pennies you jackass. Thanks Lori for the good read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Defenses are even more sophisticated now and losing guys to free agency didn't occur so quickly back then either. Continuity was a lot more possible in the pre-free agency NFL. Agreed. Think about some of the great dynasties of the past, most with multiple Hall-of-Fame-caliber players who spent their entire careers with one team, and then imagine trying to fit all those salaries under a hard cap. No coincidence that the two dominant teams of the early 90s, the Bills and Cowboys, started to decline around the time the first 'capped' year was instituted in 1994. (Hard to imagine now, but the '94 salary cap was set at $24 million. That would buy you what, four or maybe five marquee players today?) Jeff Littman, destroyer of the Bills. Wonderful. I hope this clown has no role with the Bills now. Oh, but he does. In fact, he's not only still the treasurer, he's Ralph's representative on the revenue-sharing panel. Sorry to ruin your morning... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tar and Feathers Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Agreed. Think about some of the great dynasties of the past, most with multiple Hall-of-Fame-caliber players who spent their entire careers with one team, and then imagine trying to fit all those salaries under a hard cap. No coincidence that the two dominant teams of the early 90s, the Bills and Cowboys, started to decline around the time the first 'capped' year was instituted in 1994. (Hard to imagine now, but the '94 salary cap was set at $24 million. That would buy you what, four or maybe five marquee players today?)Oh, but he does. In fact, he's not only still the treasurer, he's Ralph's representative on the revenue-sharing panel. Sorry to ruin your morning... 837703[/snapback] Should i make preparations to meet some of you at Mr. Littman's house? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Should i make preparations to meet some of you at Mr. Littman's house? 837705[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 thanks, lori. I didn't know about the wolford/littman/polian dispute. it all makes sense now ... 837141[/snapback] yeah- Polian coverd his butt by spinning this yarn and directing all the blame to Littman. How convenient that Littman isn't in the spotlight and never holds press conferences to refute therantings of the red headed madman. Polian got cute playing with the new rules that he helped design and he got burned. As always, it wasn't his fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 yeah- Polian coverd his butt by spinning this yarn and directing all the blame to Littman. How convenient that Littman isn't in the spotlight and never holds press conferences to refute therantings of the red headed madman. Polian got cute playing with the new rules that he helped design and he got burned. As always, it wasn't his fault. 837900[/snapback] The decision to fire Polian was made before the new CBA went into effect. Thanks for stopping by, though, Jeff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts