Stl Bills Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 Dude, we could be the lions. What's the difference at this point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 About 7 wins and a serviceable QB off the top of my head. The sky isn't falling just yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndyJay1234 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 So what? Dockery was a free agent, he came here because he got paid, as would most. Just because you have spend a certain amount of money doesn't mean you have to spend it like a dumbass. Thats one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard. You think people are just dying to come to Buffalo to play for a team that has not made the playoff in 9 years. At least Arizona was warm. Call it dumb but WE HAVE TO OVERPAY people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stl Bills Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 About 7 wins and a serviceable QB off the top of my head. The sky isn't falling just yet Longest Postseason Drought Buffalo Bills 1999 Wildcard Detroit Lions 1999 Wildcard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Dude, we could be the lions. The Bills don't get to play the AFC West and the NFC West this year. They may be closer than you think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 You think people are just dying to come to Buffalo to play for a team that has not made the playoff in 9 years. At least Arizona was warm. Call it dumb but WE HAVE TO OVERPAY people. Can you explain why we overpaid Kyle Williams ????????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stl Bills Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 You think people are just dying to come to Buffalo to play for a team that has not made the playoff in 9 years. At least Arizona was warm. Call it dumb but WE HAVE TO OVERPAY people. Fair Enough! I agree with you but my point is we don't have to give guys pro-bowl money when in reality their below average football players. Are you telling me you can't attract a damn good offensive lineman to Buffalo with $49 million dollars? You should be getting a pro-bowler if you are going to spend that type of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 You think people are just dying to come to Buffalo to play for a team that has not made the playoff in 9 years. At least Arizona was warm. Call it dumb but WE HAVE TO OVERPAY people. It doesn'thelp to have those sorry road uniforms. that's not a great selling point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Longest Postseason Drought Buffalo Bills 1999 Wildcard Detroit Lions 1999 Wildcard At least we got to watch them win games sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndyJay1234 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Fair Enough! I agree with you but my point is we don't have to give guys pro-bowl money when in reality their below average football players. Are you telling me you can't attract a damn good offensive lineman to Buffalo with $49 million dollars? You should be getting a pro-bowler if you are going to spend that type of money. Who was available that year that had an interest in Buffalo at the Oline position? The bills HAD to give the fans the illusion that we were fixing the line. Well in fans minds... Paying top dollar means the player must be good right. How many people on this board knew who Dockery was before the day we signed him. How many assumed he was Pro Bowl after seeing what we paid. But to give a player 49 million means he must be ALL PRO.. Nope.. But hey.. Jerry Sullivan thought we were finally paying attention the line.. The fans bought into the sell job and will continue to buy into it. The truth is the Bills had to spend x amount of dollars and what better way to do it than overspend to "fix the oline" It was all marketting along with the fact that the team had to spend that money... It is the same with draft picks.. Whitner picked 8th. Well your 8th.. It means you have to be great.. Sad part is that most fans here are so desperate for a winner that they buy into the con job every year. When the overpaid players dont work out.. We blame the player and resent them for making big money. Who are the Bills GM'ed by? A marketting guy... Not a football guy. HENCE THE PROBLEM!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 A team like Washington or Dallas that is fortunate enough to exist in a large market (and coincidentally has an owner with very large pockets) can afford to make bad decisions with player contracts, tear the contracts up and then start again. Unfortunately, the Bills are not in the same situation. Even worse than letting the wrong players leave (i.e. Pat Williams) is the opposite mistake of overpaying for players (i.e. Dockery, 2nd edition of Peerless Price , Kelsay) that do not live up to expectations. When so much money is tied to players like these, it literally takes YEARS to recover from bad contracts. It is certainly a double-edged sword. I applaud the current regime's steadfastness in trying to build the team through the draft, and by and large they have done a pretty decent job of acquiring young talent. The problem comes when so many of the young players are allowed to enter the free agent market -- and the draft then becomes a means of back-filling for the soon-to-be gone young veterans. That is why it seems like we keep having to draft a CB in the first round every year. Winfield, Clements -- and now maybe Greer (and/or McGee next year) were all allowed to walk. All of these players had to be replaced via top draft picks. Now, I can't exactly fault the front office with their decision(s) to let both Winfield and Clements go. Both clearly were after the big dollars, and there wasn't much that could have been done to keep them in the fold. One could argue that perhaps the front office could have signed them BEFORE they were eligible for free agency and got more bang for their buck. Isn't that what they tried to do with Jason Peters? For the most part, the team has done a pretty good job of retaining the right players without breaking the bank. The most notable exception is obviously Chris Kelsay, when the team decided to pay for potential rather than performance. The other problem is that since Buffalo isn't a glamor city and since the team hasn't made the playoffs in 10 years, it is more difficult to attract the big name free agents. That means that the team really isn't in the position of shopping for bargains. They either wind up with players that are not coveted by other teams -- or overpaying for players that are somewhat in demand. Was Derrick Dockery worth the money that the Bills paid him? Of course not. But the team was looking for an impact OG -- and they paid what they had to to get him. Unfortunately, he hasn't been the impact player that we hoped for. Moreover, the ridiculous contract dwarfed that of another, more worthy player by the name of Jason Peters -- which certainly played a role in his decision to hold out. The best way for this team to get better at making the right decisions, like it or not, is to continue to build some stability and continuity. Everyone talks about the Pittsburgh, and certainly they should be a model for the Bills to follow. Every year the team loses key free agents, but their front office is savvy enough to know which guys they can live without. It makes a difference that the turnover in the front office and coaching ranks has been so limited over the decades. The Bills have a great opportunity before them this off-season. They have made the decision to maintain the status quo in the coaching ranks, dispelling another year of rebuilding. Through smart budget constraint, they have placed themselves in a sound financial position, especially against the salary cap. They do not have many key free agent departures looming -- and settling the Jason Peters situation for once and for all and locking up either Greer or McGee long term would help solidify their position even more so. That way they can look toward the draft and free agency to help improve this team at key positions (OC, TE, OLB/DE, WR) rather than back-filling for other positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stl Bills Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 Who was available that year that had an interest in Buffalo at the Oline position? The bills HAD to give the fans the illusion that we were fixing the line. Well in fans minds... Paying top dollar means the player must be good right. How many people on this board knew who Dockery was before the day we signed him. How many assumed he was Pro Bowl after seeing what we paid. But to give a player 49 million means he must be ALL PRO.. Nope.. But hey.. Jerry Sullivan thought we were finally paying attention the line.. The fans bought into the sell job and will continue to buy into it. The truth is the Bills had to spend x amount of dollars and what better way to do it than overspend to "fix the oline" It was all marketting along with the fact that the team had to spend that money... It is the same with draft picks.. Whitner picked 8th. Well your 8th.. It means you have to be great.. Sad part is that most fans here are so desperate for a winner that they buy into the con job every year. When the overpaid players dont work out.. We blame the player and resent them for making big money. Who are the Bills GM'ed by? A marketting guy... Not a football guy. HENCE THE PROBLEM!! I agree with you for the most part Jay and especially about the real Problem not having a football guy in the front office. I guess my underlying point of the whole thread is......if you had a real "football guy" in the front office like we once had in Bill Polian, you wouldn't have to work so hard to market this team to the fans. The more effort at actually putting a good product on the field means less effort at having to try to sell this crap to the fans. You can try to polish a turd all you want, at the end of the day its still a turd. Its obvious that the Buffalo faithfull are more than loyal seeing that even though there hasn't been a great product on the field they've still showed up year after year. If we could actually produce a winner once in while, marketing this team would be an afterthought. It just seems like they have their priorities backwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Brandon hasn't even had a full season and you are throwing him under the bus. Why is it everyone we bring in that doesnt help us win the super bowl the next year the worst ever? This offseason and draft will be the benchmark for Brandon and the rest of the front office. How about we see what happens before we throw in the towel? Everyone has to start somewhere, you can't always bring in a proven person for every position? If that was the case, there wouldn't be an NFL draft or first time coaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 That wasn't my point, if you read my post I acknowledge we have money...that doesn't mean that it is money we will actually be spending. My point is that if you are a team in a small market and can't afford to give out money to everybody who comes available (ala Jerry Jones and the Cowboys) then you can't afford to misjudge the value of the players you actually do give big contracts to like Chris Kelsay and Derrick Dockery. Without those contracts on the books, we would still be able to pursue a proven IMPACT player like a Julius Peppers. Dockery and Kelsay aren't exactly IMPACT players.......they are average at best and grosley overpaid. The Dockery signing doesn't bother me as much as the Kelsay extension because at the time we desperately needed O-Line help but his contract is a little rediculous IMO. As for Kelsay, who has been a Buffalo guy from day one....I'd like to know exactly what the FO saw in him that really warranted the money on the extension. IIRC, Dockery has been quoted as saying he missed his friends on the O-line in washington. IF we did what we had to do to get him in a Bills uni, I am fine with that. By putting him there it plugs a hole we would have had withouthim. While he i not a probowl player, he is completely adequate, and was rarely in a bad highlight. Guards aren't supposed to be noticed. IF he were on an offense which had a lead in the 4th quarter most games, and we had the option of pounding the rock on a few drives, you would notice him a lot more. Remember this is a team game, Good WR's can make a bad QB look good, Good Qb's can make a bad O-line RB look good, a good defense can make a bad offense look good etc.... If you look at our defensive stats, they weren't bad at all. We were low on sacks and picks, but then again we never forced teams to start heaving the ball in the 4th guarter either by having a good lead. the stats will come for individual players when the team as a whole puts it all together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndyJay1234 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I agree with you for the most part Jay and especially about the real Problem not having a football guy in the front office. I guess my underlying point of the whole thread is......if you had a real "football guy" in the front office like we once had in Bill Polian, you wouldn't have to work so hard to market this team to the fans. The more effort at actually putting a good product on the field means less effort at having to try to sell this crap to the fans. You can try to polish a turd all you want, at the end of the day its still a turd. Its obvious that the Buffalo faithfull are more than loyal seeing that even though there hasn't been a great product on the field they've still showed up year after year. If we could actually produce a winner once in while, marketing this team would be an afterthought. It just seems like they have their priorities backwards. So it wasnt the dumbest argument you ever heard in the end??? :-) The reality is... This regime has very little interest in winning... They are after making money... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I am as upset as the next fan and totally see the view on Kelsay...he hadn't done ANYTHING to warrant that contract when we have a virtual clone of him in Ryan Denny on the team... but Regarding Dockery......I dont blame the front office on the Dockery signing....this was supposed to be a solid road grater run blocking OG and was one of the best (supposidly) of that years free agent class........ I dont know what the @uck happened with him this past year....I just dont know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 What is wrong with this team is the question...ok...For me this is not even a remotely complicated question and it can be summed up in one single word...quarterback... Before all the Trent lovers jump up and down and stomp their feet screaming he only has 24 games under his belt, let me say...who cares, it is irrelevant to the question at hand. Potential is not a factor in analyzing results...results are based on ACTUAL play on the field...if you want to speculate about the future, then thats a seperate topic question. The question is directed to our 2 consecutive 7-9 seasons (go any further back and it doesnt matter as those are different teams with quite a bit different personnel). Trent may be good tomorrow, but he wasn't good enough yesterday. When talking about whether QB is problem for the future, you can reference he is still developing as reason why to be hopeful. However, if you are going to make an analysis of our 7-9 seasons, the overall combined play of Trent and JP has been clearly subpar and a monster impact on why we have been below .500 both years. Sure, there are other factors...some coaching errors, injuries, last second losses, etc. But most of that can be linked directly to the overall play at QB...the fabled coaching mistakes commonly said on here this year (passing in 4th qtr against SF, rollout by Losman against Jets) become irrelevant if we had competent QB play during those games. We should have been up 21 on SF, but Losman couldnt get it done...against the Jets, the rollout should have been thrown away when the FB was taken out...again QB play. Trent in Cle was not good, yet we still could have won if Lindell makes the kick. So, if we have a QB who played even average that night, we are not kicking last minute long FG's...Trent played terrible against the better teams on our schedule and he struggled in 2 of his 4 wins to start the season where he had a 81 QB rating or less twice and never once threw for more than 1 TD, and all were against bottom feeders in the league. Again, Trent MAY be the QB of the future, and may become a really good QB in this league, but he has not played at that level consistently in 2007 and 2008 for us to be a winning franchise. When he has been hurt, JP has played pretty poor too...So unless you have DOMINANT defense like a Balt, Pitt, or Tenn then you will struggle mightily to over come poor production at QB. The direct result of weak play at QB for us is simple...struggle to a win over poor teams, but we lose against better teams...that is our persona right now...we need Trent to really take a step forward this year...if he does, we have a legit shot at the playoffs with this team as is. If not, we are looking at another year on the outside debating who to pick with the 11th or 12th pick in the draft in 2010... Again, this isnt meant to be a debate on whether he will or will not develop, if he is our QB of the future to build on...its just an analysis of how the play in 2007 and 2008 affected our record. Truth is, all the people in love with Trents potential lose sight of the fact that he is not there yet and this franchise struggles until he gets there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 What is wrong with this team is the question...ok...For me this is not even a remotely complicated question and it can be summed up in one single word...quarterback... Before all the Trent lovers jump up and down and stomp their feet screaming he only has 24 games under his belt, let me say...who cares, it is irrelevant to the question at hand. Potential is not a factor in analyzing results...results are based on ACTUAL play on the field...if you want to speculate about the future, then thats a seperate topic question. The question is directed to our 2 consecutive 7-9 seasons (go any further back and it doesnt matter as those are different teams with quite a bit different personnel). Trent may be good tomorrow, but he wasn't good enough yesterday. When talking about whether QB is problem for the future, you can reference he is still developing as reason why to be hopeful. However, if you are going to make an analysis of our 7-9 seasons, the overall combined play of Trent and JP has been clearly subpar and a monster impact on why we have been below .500 both years. Sure, there are other factors...some coaching errors, injuries, last second losses, etc. But most of that can be linked directly to the overall play at QB...the fabled coaching mistakes commonly said on here this year (passing in 4th qtr against SF, rollout by Losman against Jets) become irrelevant if we had competent QB play during those games. We should have been up 21 on SF, but Losman couldnt get it done...against the Jets, the rollout should have been thrown away when the FB was taken out...again QB play. Trent in Cle was not good, yet we still could have won if Lindell makes the kick. So, if we have a QB who played even average that night, we are not kicking last minute long FG's...Trent played terrible against the better teams on our schedule and he struggled in 2 of his 4 wins to start the season where he had a 81 QB rating or less twice and never once threw for more than 1 TD, and all were against bottom feeders in the league. Again, Trent MAY be the QB of the future, and may become a really good QB in this league, but he has not played at that level consistently in 2007 and 2008 for us to be a winning franchise. When he has been hurt, JP has played pretty poor too...So unless you have DOMINANT defense like a Balt, Pitt, or Tenn then you will struggle mightily to over come poor production at QB. The direct result of weak play at QB for us is simple...struggle to a win over poor teams, but we lose against better teams...that is our persona right now...we need Trent to really take a step forward this year...if he does, we have a legit shot at the playoffs with this team as is. If not, we are looking at another year on the outside debating who to pick with the 11th or 12th pick in the draft in 2010... Again, this isnt meant to be a debate on whether he will or will not develop, if he is our QB of the future to build on...its just an analysis of how the play in 2007 and 2008 affected our record. Truth is, all the people in love with Trents potential lose sight of the fact that he is not there yet and this franchise struggles until he gets there. Nice to see that, amidst all the "Ralph is cheap even though he spends $150M on FAs in one off-season" and "we need to trade Peters, Lynch, Evans, and Whitner", there is someone with some rationale left in their head. You are spot on. Great post, dawg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Nice to see that, amidst all the "Ralph is cheap even though he spends $150M on FAs in one off-season" and "we need to trade Peters, Lynch, Evans, and Whitner", there is someone with some rationale left in their head. You are spot on. Great post, dawg. Thanks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Yeah he was pretty bad ass, caught 10 passes How many did they throw to him? Maybe 11? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts