BILLSROCK1212
04-15-2007, 11:32 PM
How many of you said the same things when "the press" said that we were good but never were? ('01, '02, '03, '04, '05)
It's never wise to listen to the talking heads, but let's be real here, you can count the impact players on our team on one hand; Evans and Peters on offense is pretty much all of them there until Losman steps out of the ranks of the "merely good." I anticipate that he will, but until he does it hasn't happened.
On defense we have what, Schobel? Whitner and Simpson both look good and imo Simpson is the better of the two, especially in our type of D. But neither can be considered an "impact player" based on last season's performances.
All of the worst teams in the league have some good players.
Arizona has Boldin, Edge, and Fitzgerald and some other players that they would equate to Whitner and Simpson; Leinart e.g.
Detroit has Kevin Jones, Roy Williams, Dre Bly, Shaun Rogers. They have their last year's rookie hopefuls too: Ernie Sims, Daniel Bullock, Jonathon Scott for which the same things can be said as we're saying about ours.
Oakland has Warren Sapp, Randy Moss, Derrick Burgess, and their last year's draftees Huff, Howard, Bing, etc.
Houston has/had Andre Johnson, and DeMeco Ryans and their draftees from last year including Mario Williams, which you may poo-poo although he had a much better rookie year than McCargo even only on a game by game basis.
A few decent players is not much basis for hopes that your team is going to have much of a shot at anything relevant.
Our guys are Losman, Evans, Peters, Schobel, and hopefully some of last year's draftees. Really not much different than those other bad teams.
We can hope that players like Youboty, McCargo, Ellison, Haggan, and a few others step up and work out, but the odds of that happening are no different than they've been in the past or than they are for other teams. Are we special in that regard? Hardly.
It's easy to say that all the guys that just walked sucked or aren't of any utility anymore, and it's good to look at the silver linings in that way as fans, but the realities are the realities. Talk is talk.
Fletcher yes, was on the wrong side of 30 and not worth the contract. But was Langston Walker worth the contract? Two years from now you'll be saying the exact same thing about him. He's not good.
Sure, Clements wasn't worth his contract, but after your strip off the years of his contract that won't be paid, he barely got much more than Dockery did for the five or six years each will be around. So what's the difference there? They got almost equal guaranteed money.
And just because "a player got too much elsewhere" does not mean that we will not see a downgrade in play at that position. It simpliy means what it means, that we weren't willing to shell out that kind of cash. But then again, we nearly shelled out an equal amount on a year by year basis for Dockery. So I ask, what's really the difference if after five seasons both players got about the same overall? Which one of the two would have helped us more? I don't know, I'm just asking the tough questions.
We don't simply win games because we're the Bills and other teams aren't. If you want to think that we're gonna win ten or a dozen games this year, great, feel free. But the realities are that we're not as good a team as last year's team was.
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?t=124549
Don't tell me that, that is not a great post!!!!
It's never wise to listen to the talking heads, but let's be real here, you can count the impact players on our team on one hand; Evans and Peters on offense is pretty much all of them there until Losman steps out of the ranks of the "merely good." I anticipate that he will, but until he does it hasn't happened.
On defense we have what, Schobel? Whitner and Simpson both look good and imo Simpson is the better of the two, especially in our type of D. But neither can be considered an "impact player" based on last season's performances.
All of the worst teams in the league have some good players.
Arizona has Boldin, Edge, and Fitzgerald and some other players that they would equate to Whitner and Simpson; Leinart e.g.
Detroit has Kevin Jones, Roy Williams, Dre Bly, Shaun Rogers. They have their last year's rookie hopefuls too: Ernie Sims, Daniel Bullock, Jonathon Scott for which the same things can be said as we're saying about ours.
Oakland has Warren Sapp, Randy Moss, Derrick Burgess, and their last year's draftees Huff, Howard, Bing, etc.
Houston has/had Andre Johnson, and DeMeco Ryans and their draftees from last year including Mario Williams, which you may poo-poo although he had a much better rookie year than McCargo even only on a game by game basis.
A few decent players is not much basis for hopes that your team is going to have much of a shot at anything relevant.
Our guys are Losman, Evans, Peters, Schobel, and hopefully some of last year's draftees. Really not much different than those other bad teams.
We can hope that players like Youboty, McCargo, Ellison, Haggan, and a few others step up and work out, but the odds of that happening are no different than they've been in the past or than they are for other teams. Are we special in that regard? Hardly.
It's easy to say that all the guys that just walked sucked or aren't of any utility anymore, and it's good to look at the silver linings in that way as fans, but the realities are the realities. Talk is talk.
Fletcher yes, was on the wrong side of 30 and not worth the contract. But was Langston Walker worth the contract? Two years from now you'll be saying the exact same thing about him. He's not good.
Sure, Clements wasn't worth his contract, but after your strip off the years of his contract that won't be paid, he barely got much more than Dockery did for the five or six years each will be around. So what's the difference there? They got almost equal guaranteed money.
And just because "a player got too much elsewhere" does not mean that we will not see a downgrade in play at that position. It simpliy means what it means, that we weren't willing to shell out that kind of cash. But then again, we nearly shelled out an equal amount on a year by year basis for Dockery. So I ask, what's really the difference if after five seasons both players got about the same overall? Which one of the two would have helped us more? I don't know, I'm just asking the tough questions.
We don't simply win games because we're the Bills and other teams aren't. If you want to think that we're gonna win ten or a dozen games this year, great, feel free. But the realities are that we're not as good a team as last year's team was.
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?t=124549
Don't tell me that, that is not a great post!!!!