BILLS #1 Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 i am getting the vibe becuase drew rosenhaus is his agent that he mite hold out.. should we trade him or keep him because doesnt seem like he is trying everygame especially that baltimore game? and if he should leave who should we get ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 if he even tries to hold out id have his butt right out the door asap. although, maybe now would be easier to get him for a deal seeing as how he failed to hit 1000 yards this season. i wouldnt mind trading him for a 1st(which i dont think we'd get) or at least a 2nd. but i definitely wont mind if he doesnt hold out and we dont extend him and tell him to show up next year and run for his money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 a) Edgarrin James and Shawn Alexander couldnt fetch a 2nd round pick. Neither will Willis. b) Willis is crazy to hold out. He had a miserable season, and would not be negotiating from a position of strength. c) With Fred Taylor, Ahman Green and Warrick Dunn all potentially available this offseason, any indication willis intends to play hardball should be followed shortly thereafter with a public phone call to all 3 of their agents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 He HAS to stay. I was given a life size McGahee fathead decal for Christmas, which is now on the wall of my bar. It is very cool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 i am getting the vibe becuase drew rosenhaus is his agent that he mite hold out.. should we trade him or keep him because doesnt seem like he is trying everygame especially that baltimore game? and if he should leave who should we get ? Well, historically Rosenhaus clients have not held out. So if that is any indication, a holdout is unlikely. McGahee has little leverage, so that makes it more unlikely. He has little trade value so that is unlikely as well. Willis will either be playing out the final year of his deal or will be offered an extension. It's really not much of an issue. And can we be a little more intellectual around here with analysis? I mean, "it doesn't seem like he's trying too hard"? when he is lobbying for a new contract? Perhaps McGahee is just not as talented as people hoped when TD drafted him. Fine. We also played our last game against the best run D in the NFL when they had everything to play for. Oh, and newsflash but our O line isn't exactly loaded with pro bowlers either. There are reasons things happen on the field folks, and most of them have to do with ability and confidence. Internal motivation is a given for being in the NFL. So lets end the overly simplistic reasons for WM's performance ; he's not trying, he only likes playing against his pals, et al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Well, historically Rosenhaus clients have not held out. So if that is any indication, a holdout is unlikely. McGahee has little leverage, so that makes it more unlikely. He has little trade value so that is unlikely as well. Willis will either be playing out the final year of his deal or will be offered an extension. It's really not much of an issue. And can we be a little more intellectual around here with analysis? I mean, "it doesn't seem like he's trying too hard"? when he is lobbying for a new contract? Perhaps McGahee is just not as talented as people hoped when TD drafted him. Fine. We also played our last game against the best run D in the NFL when they had everything to play for. Oh, and newsflash but our O line isn't exactly loaded with pro bowlers either. There are reasons things happen on the field folks, and most of them have to do with ability and confidence. Internal motivation is a given for being in the NFL. So lets end the overly simplistic reasons for WM's performance ; he's not trying, he only likes playing against his pals, et al. Blaming the offensive line or his talent level are just as simplistic of reasons as blaming his effort level. You may not like it but that doesn't mean it may not be a factor. Or have you quickly forgotten the questions that surrounded Sam Adams or Mike Williams. Seems to me and everyone that reads this board that they were let go because of lack of internal motivation. It's a valid reason for a player's poor performance. There was a big difference in McGahee's running production from his first year here and this season's output. To me that puts the "talent" reason on real shaky ground. So that leaves the line or his effort. Newsflash, both issues are now on the table. So please get off the soapbox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Well, historically Rosenhaus clients have not held out. So if that is any indication, a holdout is unlikely. McGahee has little leverage, so that makes it more unlikely. He has little trade value so that is unlikely as well. Willis will either be playing out the final year of his deal or will be offered an extension. It's really not much of an issue. And can we be a little more intellectual around here with analysis? I mean, "it doesn't seem like he's trying too hard"? when he is lobbying for a new contract? Perhaps McGahee is just not as talented as people hoped when TD drafted him. Fine. We also played our last game against the best run D in the NFL when they had everything to play for. Oh, and newsflash but our O line isn't exactly loaded with pro bowlers either. There are reasons things happen on the field folks, and most of them have to do with ability and confidence. Internal motivation is a given for being in the NFL. So lets end the overly simplistic reasons for WM's performance ; he's not trying, he only likes playing against his pals, et al. Willis is a power back who in my opinion adds very little to the passing game- Willis needs a very good blocking fullback to be effective- the interior of our O-line seems more finess than the type of power blockers that would be best for McGahee's style of running- for the last few years the plan seemed to be for a power running ball control offence with a strong defense- I think with the emergence of Losman we might want to go to more one back sets with 2 TEs or 3 WRs. two different ways to go 1. go with Willis - replace at least one of your interior o-line with a great run blocker -get a great blocking FB- any TE needs to be a great blocker first- you'd like to replace Peerless with a taller tougher WR to run all the underneath routes and crossing patterns and as a redzone target. 2. get a quicker, shiftier better receiving back like Marshawn Lynch- keep our exsisting o-line- add a TE like Daniel Graham- have more size/speed options at the second receiver because Graham, Lynch, Reed, Parrish, could handle more underneath routes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 two different ways to go 1. go with Willis - replace at least one of your interior o-line with a great run blocker -get a great blocking FB- any TE needs to be a great blocker first- you'd like to replace Peerless with a taller tougher WR to run all the underneath routes and crossing patterns and as a redzone target. 2. get a quicker, shiftier better receiving back like Marshawn Lynch- keep our exsisting o-line- add a TE like Daniel Graham- have more size/speed options at the second receiver because Graham, Lynch, Reed, Parrish, could handle more underneath routes. What do we have here? The tail wagging the dog? Let's build the team to suit Willis? WTF? How bout either WM play, or the Bills get a RB that can play? If we go with #1, it comes with a condition... add a great run blocker (at the expense of pass protection). What do we gain? Willis still sucks, he's a zero in the passing game... the passing game that you've just watered down by losing pass protection. If we go with #2, the drafting of Lynch still comes with a condition... pick up a FA TE. Alas, are you absouletley sure Lynch is a franchise back? We're talking a #12 pick here...does Lynch give you 1600 yards combined rushing/receiving? If not, he sure as hell does not merit a #12. How bout this... we shore up the defense first. WM is still under contract for next season. I don't see how he can be worse than he's been this year... If he isn't we still get the same amount of production from the run game next year. Basically, barely adequate. However, we end up shoring up the defense ... which gives the Bills 3 more wins with out shooting themselves in the foot salary cap wise. Then... if Willis is "God", like so many people seem to think, and has a very good year, the Bills have the option of "franchising" him and either re-upping him or trading him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 What do we have here? The tail wagging the dog? Let's build the team to suit Willis? WTF? How bout either WM play, or the Bills get a RB that can play? If we go with #1, it comes with a condition... add a great run blocker (at the expense of pass protection). What do we gain? Willis still sucks, he's a zero in the passing game... the passing game that you've just watered down by losing pass protection. If we go with #2, the drafting of Lynch still comes with a condition... pick up a FA TE. Alas, are you absouletley sure Lynch is a franchise back? We're talking a #12 pick here...does Lynch give you 1600 yards combined rushing/receiving? If not, he sure as hell does not merit a #12. How bout this... we shore up the defense first. WM is still under contract for next season. I don't see how he can be worse than he's been this year... If he isn't we still get the same amount of production from the run game next year. Basically, barely adequate. However, we end up shoring up the defense ... which gives the Bills 3 more wins with out shooting themselves in the foot salary cap wise. Then... if Willis is "God", like so many people seem to think, and has a very good year, the Bills have the option of "franchising" him and either re-upping him or trading him. nope Lynch will give you 1568 yds rushing and receiving Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 i am getting the vibe becuase drew rosenhaus is his agent that he mite hold out.. should we trade him or keep him because doesnt seem like he is trying everygame especially that baltimore game? and if he should leave who should we get ? Stay the course and keep an open door and do a little outreach to Rosenhaus as his final season draws near and if WM will sign a deal which is favorable to our cap then sign an extension. If on the other hand he is looking for top RB money he has been a good but not very good RB yet so let him play out his deal and make FA decisions next year. If he continues to perform well at times but is not a consistent top RB next year then see what the market offers him. If he has a great year next year (actually produces like a top 5 RB then negotiate and show him the money or tag him and play him again. As having two go two backs is the trend in the NFL these days drafting an RB we think has potential to one day be a star is a prudent thing to do, but this draft pick must wait until the second day as this team has too many other pressing needs to fill. The GM should not let any fans who have their panties all up in a wad and insist on moving WM because they do not like his "baby momma" comments which have nothing to do with the game on the field or they are mindreaders and can diagnose his attitude influence his actions. he should ignore fan whining about WM as long as he is performing sometimes well but always presents a threat which opponents must gameplan for. Ignore the whiners and stay the course. Its a dumb strategy for something important like Iraq but is perfectly fine for dealing with these men who get far too much money to play a boys game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I'd extend him for 2.5 million a year over 4 years and a 3 million signing bonus. Make the contract incentive laden. It's not much money if he plays to potential. If he doesn't, the Bills don't lose much if they cut him. It's not a bad deal fo rthe Bills or Willis. He's just not worth much more than that. If he wants more, let him go. We can find his replacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyBillsFan Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Yes, we should trade him and get the average for a RB like Willis, 2nd or 3rd round pick Then, we should get rid of everyone elso on this team and sell to the first buyer! Then, all the fans of the Buffalo Bills can help the new owner pack the Mayflower trucks and we can all have a big cookout and relive the old days... How about this... Sign our players and quit being everyones stepping stone to the playoffs... These guys are not in the league to play for free... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffaloed in Pa Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Who cares ,I`m burned out on this subject already. One thousand more post`s to go on this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeF Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 1. Keep Him...trade value is non-existent 2. Do not extend him. He can't hold out--his agent thankfully is smarter than that...backs who had average years don't hold out 3. Draft a back in the first three rounds 4. Sign A-Train for 2 years at just above the vet min. 5. Bye bye Shaud Williams Any questions? I'll be the first to predict that Willis, barring injury, has a 1200+ yard year next year and then bids us adieu...he wants out of Buffalo so bad it will be a huge motivating factor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 It's not like I think Willis sucks - I just don't think he's anything special- I don't think he's better than Henry- Hell I don't think he's much better than Antowain Smith- so hearing anything about a contract extention before the seasons over kinda chaps me - he's not good enough to be any type of disruption- he's the freaken 24th back in rushing yardage and he doesn't add much to the passing game - now you don't have to have an all world back to go to the Superbowl O.J. Anderson, Antowain Smith- so in that regard I'm ok with Willis but if he gives any indication that he's going to anything but shutup and play hard his last year then they should dump him like a bad habit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 1. Keep Him...trade value is non-existent 2. Do not extend him. He can't hold out--his agent thankfully is smarter than that...backs who had average years don't hold out 3. Draft a back in the first three rounds 4. Sign A-Train for 2 years at just above the vet min. 5. Bye bye Shaud Williams Any questions? I'll be the first to predict that Willis, barring injury, has a 1200+ yard year next year and then bids us adieu...he wants out of Buffalo so bad it will be a huge motivating factor... It depends upon how we evaluate the RBs but I would hope there is one we see worth taking and developing on the second day as I would rather we spend our first day picks on drafting positions like OL and DL which are more likely to turn this team into a winner. 1200 yards for WM next year would be nice, but the critical thing is for Fairchild to develop this O so that is uses the RB as nore of a pass threat. The Ravens game started off nicely with a very good pick-up on a pass reception by WM which was called back due to an illegal motion penalty (I think) or something which had little to do with the success of the play. WM is unproven as of yet as a receiver, but this is because we have not used him that way and he has shown some potential the few times we have done this such as the opening of the Ravens game. The key here is that he has no leverage if he holds out and Rosenhaus' past MO is that his players do not hold out. If he has a great season he still has little leverage since if he is that good we simply tag him, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 1. Keep Him...trade value is non-existent 2. Do not extend him. He can't hold out--his agent thankfully is smarter than that...backs who had average years don't hold out 3. Draft a back in the first three rounds 4. Sign A-Train for 2 years at just above the vet min. 5. Bye bye Shaud Williams Any questions? I'll be the first to predict that Willis, barring injury, has a 1200+ yard year next year and then bids us adieu...he wants out of Buffalo so bad it will be a huge motivating factor... if it happened like that, and our drafted RB shows he can run hard, then i wouldnt be upset... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeF Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 It depends upon how we evaluate the RBs but I would hope there is one we see worth taking and developing on the second day as I would rather we spend our first day picks on drafting positions like OL and DL which are more likely to turn this team into a winner. 1200 yards for WM next year would be nice, but the critical thing is for Fairchild to develop this O so that is uses the RB as nore of a pass threat. The Ravens game started off nicely with a very good pick-up on a pass reception by WM which was called back due to an illegal motion penalty (I think) or something which had little to do with the success of the play. WM is unproven as of yet as a receiver, but this is because we have not used him that way and he has shown some potential the few times we have done this such as the opening of the Ravens game. The key here is that he has no leverage if he holds out and Rosenhaus' past MO is that his players do not hold out. If he has a great season he still has little leverage since if he is that good we simply tag him, All good points PG...I just don't view Willis as in the league of the top tier of backs--I am not just talking Johnson, Alexander and Tomlinson but also Barber (not that it matters); Parker; Westbrook; Gore; Stephen Jackson maybe even Joseph Addai ...I think Willis is replaceable and we have the best of both worlds -- we can keep Willis and train a replacement concurrently... Your point about not using a first day pick is pretty insightful--not everyone on the list is a first day pick...and I don't like using first day picks on a position where the shelf life is not very long... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 He HAS to stay. I was given a life size McGahee fathead decal for Christmas, which is now on the wall of my bar. It is very cool! You should be able to get about $5 for that in a garage sale next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 It depends upon how we evaluate the RBs but I would hope there is one we see worth taking and developing on the second day as I would rather we spend our first day picks on drafting positions like OL and DL which are more likely to turn this team into a winner. 1200 yards for WM next year would be nice, but the critical thing is for Fairchild to develop this O so that is uses the RB as nore of a pass threat. The Ravens game started off nicely with a very good pick-up on a pass reception by WM which was called back due to an illegal motion penalty (I think) or something which had little to do with the success of the play. WM is unproven as of yet as a receiver, but this is because we have not used him that way and he has shown some potential the few times we have done this such as the opening of the Ravens game. The key here is that he has no leverage if he holds out and Rosenhaus' past MO is that his players do not hold out. If he has a great season he still has little leverage since if he is that good we simply tag him, That is the great thing about rbs, some of them, if they are talented enough can usually jump into an NFL system & hit the ground running. This aspect is honestly why there is no trade value in Rbs anymore. That & they usually have a short shelf life. Let Willis play out his last year & no matter how well he does bid farewell when the season is over. Now there is exceptions to every rule(LT & Larry Johnson come to mind). If he does have an unreal year, the bills could franchise him. The bills are in a no loose situation here as long as they dont panick like they did with Clements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts