Am I the only one, or is anyone worried about...

[WG]

... the Henry/McGahee situation. Hear me out please.

I'm operating under the "if it isn't broke, don't fix it scenario" here. Assuming that Henry corrects his fumbling issues, and I still say Bledsoe's INT issues are the greater of the two evils, then we have on our hands one of the top couple of RBs in the league. Right.

Also, keep in mind, that if he hadn't gotten fewer than 20 carries in half the games last year, and 15 or fewer in 6 games, Henry likely would have challenged for league rushing title.

My concern is this; aren't we getting a bit greedy here?

I assume that in his second full season starting, that Henry will continue to work out his issues. Suppose he does. Suppose he becomes #1, 2, or 3 in the league. Sure, he'll be worth a ton. Suppose we then rely on McGahee, we trade Henry, which seems to be the going preference. Then suppose Henry has 6 more outstanding seasons while McGahee goes down w/ yet another, his would-be 4th major injury over his football career.

Wouldn't we then be left out in the cold?

Sure, there's no question that McGahee is the better rusher assuming that he plays the same in the NFL that he did in college. We still have no clue how he'll be "on the field" all doctors' prognoses aside. We also have no clue as to whether or not he'll get hurt again.

In short, if Henry progresses at the rate he did last year, challenges for the NFL's rushing title, with no significant injury issues, wouldn't it be a tad bit greedy and much riskier to trade him and keep McGahee?

Sure, let's assume that McGahee really will be better than that? But how much better would we need? I mean really!

Anyway, I just think this entire thing is a bit greedy and that we could have addressed some holes/needs that would have helped us this season instead of maybe helping us in '04/'05.

I don't think the improvement in the marginal utility of McGahee over Henry is anywhere near worth the risk. If McGahee has even another moderate injury, it will likely make him nowhere near a RB that can compete for the NFL's best. If Henry becomes such a RB, then why trade him!

I realize that this season has yet to bear itself out, but I think these are valid concerns.

[Pride]

I am with you!!! I have been saying this since Saturday. I just dont like the pick!

Not only for the reasons you spoke of, but there is a whole mental thing when you are looking over your shoulder all season waiting for that Number 1 draft pick to be "tested"

[THATHURMANATOR]

I agree but lets hope it doesn't go down like that!

[Pride]

I am just hoping that we are hanging on to McGahee, keep up the rehab, test him during training camp, and show to the league, maybe in preseason, what he can do.

Then trade his butt to a team that realizes they dont have a franchise back this season for their next 2 #1 draft picks.

Too good to be true?

[THATHURMANATOR]

"I am with you!!! I have been saying this since Saturday. I just dont like the pick!"

Thats fine pride but who would you have picked at that point?

[justasportsfan]

I think Henry will push to be the best that he can be. Not in a years time , 2 years time but now. The bills are hoping for him to run us to the SB.

It's obvious we are looking to run the ball this season and pinning huge hopes on Henry's shoulders. If indeed this move get's to Henry's head, hopefully it will be a positive one that could be a good one for us.

I think TD is sending Henry a message, we're banking on you and we're not joking about it. Prove to us you are a franchise RB who can carry this team all the way to the SB.

[Dman]

Don't get me wrong...I think that Henry is a good back..that may or may not have some great years ahead of him...but this 3 yards and a cloud of dust and 20+ carries thing can and does get monotinous and dangerous especially to a back that has trouble holding on to the ball.
But....when you have a back like McGahee sitting at the doorstep waiting to come in..you take him in..this guy is in the mold of OJ, Dickerson and Barry Sanders. Every time he touches the ball he has that gamebreaking ability. I sit and think about a 2nd and 3 from our own 15 and ...BOOM...there he goes...85 yds...TD..
those guys are few and far between.

In my opinion this is a win/win situation..if WM doesn't pan out we still have Henry and if he does flourish then we have options for Henry..and if either of these guys can't cope with the heat of competition for this position..then they don't belong in this league.

Plus..I still think that NE had him targeted with the 4th pick in the second round...and if he does come around..I'm thankful that we don't have to face him 2 times a year.

But..I could be wrong

[HenryRules]

I think McGahee has the most potential at RB since Bo Jackson. No one since then has had the power and speed that Bo provided. McGahee also has the commitment to stick to one sport. He could really be something special.

[Pride]

I would have traded down in the draft and picked up 2 #2's and a later round pick.

That, or trade for a good FS/WR and picks

[HenryRules]

Pride, who would you have made those trades with? No one wanted to move up.

[lordofgun]

Henry could blow his knee out right after we trade him too. There's always a risk in every move.

Hopefully this surgery has been extremely successful. Is it any wonder that the 4th ligament (which WM previously tore in high school) was the only one that didn't snap? Sometimes with good surgery, repair job is stronger than the original.

[TedMock]

These are valid concerns and yes, I've thought about them as well. The thing is there was no 1st round DE talent left. If Kelsay had been taken before we got to him then there was Corey Redding and Rien Long still out there. There were no FS's worth taking at that pick either and I don't think you go with a TE at that spot. The only guy left would be William Joseph, DT Miami, whom I thought we'd take. McGahee is a gamble but not a stupid pick by any means. We did sign a few new starters on defense and they seem to be high on Bannon and Edwards as backups. There's also June 1 cuts and we're going to have about $4mil at that point. Even if McGahee only ends up marginally better, it's still better which never hurts. I personally think that IF he comes back he'll be amazing. If we're lucky Henry has another great year less the fumbles and we trade him for a player of equal value or 1st round picks. As a professional RB if he is negatively affected mentally because of the pick then frankly I don't want him here. Competitors thrive on this sort of thing and I think Henry has that characteristic. He's a tough guy physically and mentally. I like Henry a lot and would be happy with him here too. Either way we're in a good situation if WM heals properly.

[Tatonka]

wys.. you hated henry just last season, and thought that bryson was the bomb.. you could/will change your opinion on McGahee too as soon as he has his first good game..

and if Wm doesnt have a good game.. then henry will continue to be the starter..

[The Spaz]

It has to happen 1st. I am not worried at all. Go Bills!

[Lone Stranger]

Games are won and lost in the trenches. That's where we should have concentrated. We don't need a glory-boy.....I also think TD got caught up with all the accolades he has been receiving.

[HenryRules]

fmr60, who would you have picked then, Faine? He would have caused huge disruption on the line, moreso than McGahee at running back.
If William Joseph is your answer, I can understand that choice, but I think Bannan and Edwards have proven to be capable enough to rotate through the team and should be given the opportunity to develop. I don't think they would receive this opp. with Joseph around.

[Romes]

Faine had already been selected by the time our pick came around.

[HenryRules]

my mistake.

[Romes]

your point is still valid though. There was no one that played the trenches worth taking at that spot.

[Captain gameboy]

The draft is a gathering of assets. Some you need, some represent future value.
The front office thinks WM represents a fair risk/reward future value. Further, they apparently thought nobody else that was available had that same risk/reward ratio.
Let's not make too big of a deal out of this, yet. Time will tell. I still think we need a burner receiver and another legitimate starting caliber OL'man for insurance. I'm way more concerned about that, and they weren't available in the draft.

[Voltron]

I go to PT twice a week and I asked my PT guy about Willis' knee. He said the fact that he was in such good shape to begin with is the best part of it. Second best being that he was operated on very quickly and by some of the best surgeons in the US is great too. If it would have happened to me or someone else that was not in that type of shape we may not walk for 6 months or more. He also said that fact that he is in the prime of his life, his work ethic and the fact that we are deep enough at RB that we can sit him for a year he bets he will be at about 99 % of what he was in college. He also said that the fact that he has a history of injury is not good though. He said if he ever hurts that knee again his career would be more or less over.

[Tatonka]

well.. the part of the knee that was injuried before was actually stronger than the rest of his knee.. it was the only part of his knee that held up.

[DraftBoy]

Wys I see your points, and have thought of them myself, but alot of people on this board (id guess 85%) were saying just take the Best Player Available. Willis McGahee is by far the best player available at #23. Hell he was a sure top 5 pick till the Fiesta Bowl. He had the best surgeon in the country (Dr. James Andrews) do his kneee reconstruction, and all the teams who looked at him said his knee was looking great rehab wise. He is slated to be ready this season to play. He says hes gonna play I would sit him out till week 8 or so and then let him go through practices at full contact. I dont wanna rush this player. He is one of those special players you only get to see once in a good while. Thurman Thomas was another type of special player.

fmr60 Im sorry but I completely disagree with your statement the game is own in the trenches. The game is won on the scoreboard. You cant win if you cant score. McGahee was the best pick.

[Earthquake Enyart]

You make the playoffs with guys like Henry.
You win championships with guys like McGehee.

[Dozerdog]

... and you can lose wit anybody;)

[HenryRules]

I've seen it mentioned a few times that Dr. James Andrews reconstructed McGahee's knee. Its a minor point of contention, but I'm pretty sure it was Dr. John Uribe who is UM's team surgeon. A strange coincidence is that he is also the Miami Dolphins team doctor. Good thing they did the surgery before the draft.

[buffaloscott]

what if,what if,,,i just can't wait to see.either way TD has made being a bills fan fun..lots to talk about.So win or lose, today has been great...

[G. Host]

Raiders offered to move up as did Titans did.
Raiders were on the clock talking to Bills.
I was at Draft Party and spoke to a coach there during autograph party and he said they did not offer enough to move up.
Did not say what was enough.



Originally posted by HenryRules
Pride, who would yoyu have made those trades with? No one wanted to move up.

[WG]

Originally posted by Earthquake Enyart
You make the playoffs with guys like Henry.
You win championships with guys like McGehee.

Yeah, and you don't win championships w/ QBs like Bledsoe who's got an absolutely horrendous record of personal performance in all playoff games both individually and collectively, either!

Many of you are missing the point on the other. How is McGahee gonna be worth anything?

Only if he plays, right? If all of a sudden Henry plays well and we try to dish McGahee, sure, we may get a first round pick, but I don't see us getting more than that. Like Ingtar said though, a first round pick next season is worth a second this year. I'd rather have taken Henderson, who's an animal as we'll see, or even Joseph who went two picks later and would have backfilled an aging DT corps.

But how is McGahee gonna get showcased? Does anyone really believe that Henry is gonna play so poorly that we decide to give McGahee a shot??? Come on. It ain't gonna happen. And suppose he plays a handful of plays and we "decide" he's our man and trade Henry? Why? If nothing is wrong w/ Henry, then the risk of McGahee further injuring himself is high.

Sure, sometimes surgeries are just as strong as the original. They're rarely better. I know, I've had 7 knee surgeries and could direct an ACL reconstruction out of pure self-education. But McGahee's had two other serious injuries I've read. One more in his freshman year at Miami I think it was, and another in H.S.

That makes his risk factor HIGH. It would make me sick to trade a guy like Henry, assuming he picks up where he left off which we have no reason to think he won't, and then have McGahee injure himself again.

Meanwhile, we could have been building for a position that we really need instead of gambling on the future. You supporters can say what you want, but the evidence stands on the side making McGahee a huge risk. If it works out, yes, then and only then, will it have paid off. But this "it's gonna happen gimme mentality" has no basis. This is a hope your brains out, b/c no one, not even the doctors can prove anything until McGahee's stepped on the field.

And what about this? Suppose he comes on late in the season and gets hurt again. Guess what? Our grade for this draft drops to a D- unless one of the others has stepped up!

Hope is hope, but McGahee isn't special or a player who will do anything for the team until he actually does. I really don't feel like saying "if only McGahee hadn't blown out his knee again or we didn't trade Henry, then we'd have won the division." I'd rather just make do with Henry, who was among the league's top 5 rushers last year w/ hardly any carries in half his games, then bark at the mirror image of the dog in the water w/ "a larger bone."

And suppose McGahee isn't all that and a bag of chips? Suppose he doesn't get hurt, but has lost some speed and is only as good as Henry? I think such a trade would have been foolish since Henry has no injury history.

I really would have liked to have seen Henderson in our D backfield. I don't think many of you saw him play, but he was highly impact! I don't care what the scouts and GMs say, he was a first rounder and we needed LB depth at minimum, although I think some of you will be joining me later in the year in saying that Fletcher is only adequate.

Anyway, we can all say anything we want, but three knee injuries in three straight seasons, all costing him half a season twice, and then last year, is a bit much for me to get all worked up over.

[WG]

I just checked, he had that horrible knee injury last year for which only the "miraculous recovery" that he is apparently experiencing and for which I say will only be known once he steps on the field, could have kept him at his full potential.

Last year, he had 67 carries for 314 yards and 3 TDs and suffered a knee injury midseason.

In his senior high school year, two years earlier, he played only 5 games due to yet another knee injury sustained.

The only year he wasn't injured was the year he didn't play while he was redshirted.

IDK, but I wish we had taken Henderson or Joseph.

[Captain gameboy]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


Yeah, and you don't win championships w/ QBs like Bledsoe who's got an absolutely horrendous record of personal performance in all playoff games both individually and collectively, either!


You win championships with QB's who play well in championship games; some, yet to be played.
You don't win championships by throwing past perf stats out and projecting future results.
You're quote contains the phrase "all playoff games."
I'm pretty sure most football fans would not consider Bledsoe's performance in the AFC championship game two years ago as being "horrendous."
Let's not write a history. Just a simple question.
Was his performance "horrendous?"

[imbondz]

Originally posted by gameboy


You win championships with QB's who play well in championship games; some, yet to be played.
You don't win championships by throwing past perf stats out and projecting future results.
You're quote contains the phrase "all playoff games."
I'm pretty sure most football fans would not consider Bledsoe's performance in the AFC championship game two years ago as being "horrendous."
Let's not write a history. Just a simple question.
Was his performance "horrendous?"

First of all, he only played a quarter of that game right? He took the f-a-giots to the SuperBowl in '97 and played outstanding in those playoff games. I think he played great in the first half of that SB game also.

Did we forget about Elway? Wys, with your reasoning, his SuperBowl victories are impossible.

[WG]

Originally posted by gameboy


You win championships with QB's who play well in championship games; some, yet to be played.
You don't win championships by throwing past perf stats out and projecting future results.
You're quote contains the phrase "all playoff games."
I'm pretty sure most football fans would not consider Bledsoe's performance in the AFC championship game two years ago as being "horrendous."
Let's not write a history. Just a simple question.
Was his performance "horrendous?"

I'll make a deal with you:

You tell me whether it was good. I'll stick by my horrendous, and then toss out some other stats as well. If you want me to answer, then you answer!

THEN, I'll post the stats, drive by drive, play by play, and we'll let everyone else be the judge.

What say ye?

Caveat: If you accept, you are making half a drive of about 40 yards and 1 TD the entire crux of your argument. B/c indeed, his performance after that was in fact abysmal. So were each and every one of his other playoff performances.

Anyway, ante up and we'll take it from there. I've got all the stats somewhere...

:D

I'm curious to see what you think good is.

[Captain gameboy]

You can post whatever you want about whatever you want.
I am simply stunned by any reasonable person saying that first, a future football game performance can be predicted on past playoff performance and second, that someone would rate that particular performance, coming off the bench as the result of injury, as being "horrendous".
Damn, I'm glad you don't coach any kids I know.

[WG]

Geez, someone piss in your cornflakes!

Kids love me and I don't need or appreciate such remarks when you barely know me!

Nice of you to back up your own statements! Gosh I just love it when people criticize and then don't stand behind their statements!

If I'm right, then everything that you just said is drivel!

If I'm wrong, then I'm more than happy to go to the table examining the evidence! I'm not the one throwing stones from the glass house here, am I!

All I'm saying, and I'm very sorry you are having trouble grasping this, but Bledsoe's record of playoff performance is abysmal. If you think I'm FoS then you can paint me the fool by simply providing some evidence to the contrary!

Since you don't, I and everyone else reading can only assume that you don't have any!

As such, I'll dismiss your argument, which has only been raised and successfully refuted one too many times here, as completely frivolous! Otherwise put up some statements backing up your position that I'm somehow wrong on this! Otherwise, I might suggest simply not making indefensable statements!

[WG]

P.S. I'm stunned by you making such remarks and then running like a whipped wench when they're challenged!

[Tatonka]

man.. it is instigations like that wys that had you on ignore for so long.. with the nice little P.S. crap..

wys.. he is saying that history doesnt always predict the future.. sure, bledsoe has played poorly in the playoffs.. it doesnt necessarily mean he will with the next shot he gets.. i cant back that up with stats because it hasnt happened yet..

[Captain gameboy]

"All I'm saying, and I'm very sorry you are having trouble grasping this, but Bledsoe's record of playoff performance is abysmal. If you think I'm FoS then you can paint me the fool by simply providing some evidence to the contrary!"

Is the condescension necessary?

I'm not really having trouble grasping anything, Wys. I simply asked a question. Was his performance horrendous, and does it have predictive value in a future game?

Again, by you:
I'm stunned by you making such remarks and then running like a whipped wench when they're challenged!

How exactly does one "run like a whipped wench?" Whatever your insulting definition, rest assured I'm not running. If your judgement is that running like a whipped wench is disagreeing with your appraisal of Bledsoe's performance in that particular championship game, then there are tens of thousands of us whipped wenches running.
Why do we ever play these games? It's all in the past. Its all predictable.

[WG]

Look, you can read TT. I don't need your assessment. He's taking cheap shots at me and all I've done is point out some stuff w/o taking any shots at anyone.

I mean if you want to get real, which of the two of us actually posted anything but opinioins here?

Come on TT. Don't just defend him b/c of my position on Bledsoe and b/c you disagree. If you wanna pick up the standard and run w/ it, fine. Do it. I don't care. But taking his side when he makes statements about me and kids and the like that are off base and all I do is fire back to try to get him to back up his statements is wrong.

If there's anything to any of it, then he should be able to produce it. I'm lookin' at it right here in front of me now and if he, you, or anyone else thinks there's any verity to it, great. Let's lay it out and see what the truth is, eh. What's wrong w/ that!

I know, I know, the truth sometimes hurts. Especially when it involves your hero. ;)

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Wys Guy

I know, I know, the truth sometimes hurts. Especially when it involves your hero. ;)

it is comments like that.. you sneak them into every post to irritate the crap out of people, then you act surprised when people cant stand you.

gameboy has a point.. if history is such an accurate predictor, then why even play the games.. i mean.. give me a break..

travis fumbled 11 times last season.. history shows that he is a fumbler.. there must be no way he can correct that.. thats it... he mine as well quit.. hes a fumbler..

I know, I know.. the truth sometimes hurts.. especially when it involves your idol. ;)

[imbondz]

Holy crap Tatonka, how did your avatar know that I moved to my right?

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by imbondz
Holy crap Tatonka, how did your avatar know that I moved to my right?

muhahaha ;)

:nerd2:

[kgun12]

All I know is that most of the posts for WM have If's Hope's and maybe's when they talk about him playing like he once did. When you look at his past and hope about his future the pick was horrible! A Kelsay at 100% at 23 is much better than WM recovering. You have to also look at the fact that there was NOT A NEED at RB to take such a huge chance on a guy with this type of injury. I don't care that his knee might be stronger after it's heel, his has 3 surgeries now, it may get stronger, butafter 3 it's one shot from career ending.

[Tatonka]

how come we never get tired of repeating ourselves? that is all we do till the next bit of news comes up .. i know i do it too.. each thread is just the same people saying the same thing.. it is not like we ever change each others opinions.. or one person admits they are "way off" or something..

when does training camp start.. ugh..

[WG]

Originally posted by gameboy
"All I'm saying, and I'm very sorry you are having trouble grasping this, but Bledsoe's record of playoff performance is abysmal. If you think I'm FoS then you can paint me the fool by simply providing some evidence to the contrary!"

Is the condescension necessary?

I'm not really having trouble grasping anything, Wys. I simply asked a question. Was his performance horrendous, and does it have predictive value in a future game?

Again, by you:
I'm stunned by you making such remarks and then running like a whipped wench when they're challenged!

How exactly does one "run like a whipped wench?" Whatever your insulting definition, rest assured I'm not running. If your judgement is that running like a whipped wench is disagreeing with your appraisal of Bledsoe's performance in that particular championship game, then there are tens of thousands of us whipped wenches running.
Why do we ever play these games? It's all in the past. Its all predictable.

"Is the condescension necessary?"

I don't know! Perhaps you should ask yourself since you put it up first, eh.

"Damn, I'm glad you don't coach any kids I know."


"I simply asked a question. Was his performance horrendous, and does it have predictive value in a future game?"

Was it horrendous? I think so, very much so. All I can say is that if you don't think so, let's post the data and look at it. As a matter of fact, I'll go ahead and do it anyway after this and perhaps you can tell what it was if in fact it wasn't horrendous. Fair and poor will not be alternatives to counter my claim.

Does it have predictive value in a future game?

Under the tenets of good deductive reasoning, yes, yes it does. In fact, under such tenets, it is the only reasonable conclusion that you can draw.

Do you think that his past playoff performances indicate that he'll do completely the opposite given his current circumstances?


My "whipped wench" comment was made at your insinuating that I'm somehow throwing up bogus comments, statements, and other info which is ill substantiated. When I called you on it, did you respond by saying here, here's something to indicate that you are wrong? No. You responded by condescending to me and by making more statements based purely on opinions w/o even stating that perhaps there was some basis to my comments. I.e., your behavior was more that of a frightened little girl than of a man who backs up his words.

Look, if you don't want to deal with the truth, that's fine. But then at least have the decency to not slander anyone who very well defines their arguments! You know the saying. Either put up or shut up. Not to be disrespectful, but talk is cheap. So either put up some stuff to back up your statements or implications or simply don't attack those who argue counter to you simply b/c you don't particularly care for the issues raised.

[Tatonka]

:deadhorse:

[WG]

gb,

Here's Drew's performance from the game in question:

Overall:

10 of 21, for 102, 1 TD, 47.6% complete on the game, 4.86 YPA

7 of 18 for 66, 38.9% complete in the other 5 drives after the rest of that first series begun by Brady, 3.67 YPA


Drive Down To Go FP Compl. Attempt Yards TD
1 1 10 PIT 40 1 1 15 2 6 PIT 21 1 1 10 1 10 PIT 11 1 1 11

2 1 10 PIT 35 0 1 0 2 10 " 1 1 3 3 7 PIT 32 0 1 0 4 7 " 0 1 0
3 2 12 NWE 32 0 1 0 3 12 " SACK -10

4 1 10 NWE 39 0 1 0 2 10 NWE 29 1 1 15 1 15 NWE 39 1 1 13 3 3 PIT 38 1 1 6 3 4 PIT 26 0 1 0
5 1 10 NWE 9 0 1 0 2 10 NWE 9 1 1 7 3 3 NWE 16 1 1 4 1 10 NWE 20 0 1 0 2 10 NWE 20 SACK -1
3 11 NWE 19 1 1 18 2 10 NWE 37 0 1 0 3 10 NWE 37 0 1 0
6 3 8 PIT 32 0 1 0
7 Ran out the clock

Now if there's someone out there who can tell me that that isn't a crap game, then we have some serious honesty issues!

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Tatonka


it is comments like that.. you sneak them into every post to irritate the crap out of people, then you act surprised when people cant stand you.

gameboy has a point.. if history is such an accurate predictor, then why even play the games.. i mean.. give me a break..

travis fumbled 11 times last season.. history shows that he is a fumbler.. there must be no way he can correct that.. thats it... he mine as well quit.. hes a fumbler..

I know, I know.. the truth sometimes hurts.. especially when it involves your idol. ;)

just wanted to say that again.

[WG]

If that defines anything but horrendous, then I can see why some people believe the things that they believe.

BTW, that didn't come out very well. I'm happy to send the spreadsheet. The bottom line is that Bledsoe wasn't anything but completely ineffective for other than the last 4 plays of the first drive on which Brady led the team down to PIT's 40. Bledsoe's only success in that game was on the first 4 plays. After that, PIT had him pegged just like most teams did after a few games last year too.

[imbondz]

Originally posted by imbondz


First of all, he only played a quarter of that game right? He took the f-a-giots to the SuperBowl in '97 and played outstanding in those playoff games. I think he played great in the first half of that SB game also.

Did we forget about Elway? Wys, with your reasoning, his SuperBowl victories are impossible.

Then I want to say this again.

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Tatonka


just wanted to say that again.

i just want to say this again.

[WG]

T,

We've been over that. But people like you won't admit that Henry's fumbles only cost us one game while Drew averaged nearly 3 TO's/game in 7 losses!

So talk about beating dead horses. As well, funny how when I peg Bledsoe, you have to turn to some other aspect of our team when it has absolutely nothing to do w/ the argument at hand.

What on earth does Henry have to do with Bledsoe's PO performances?

BTW, you wanna step up and point out where Bledsoe played well in that game? You wanna put the pants on here, or just criticize b/c you have no counterargument.

Now what does all this have to do with the McGahee thing???

[Tatonka]

and this..

if history is such an accurate predictor, then why even play the games.. i mean.. give me a break..

travis fumbled 11 times last season.. history shows that he is a fumbler.. there must be no way he can correct that.. thats it... he mine as well quit.. hes a fumbler..

I know, I know.. the truth sometimes hurts.. especially when it involves your idol.

[imbondz]

Originally posted by Tatonka


i just want to say this again.


What was that again Tatonka?

[THATHURMANATOR]

"Yeah, and you don't win championships w/ QBs like Bledsoe who's got an absolutely horrendous record of personal performance in all playoff games both individually and collectively, either!"

LOL couldn't resist that huh WYS?

[Tatonka]

wys.. henry's fumbles cost us one game LAST YEAR.. how do you know when he drops the ball 11 times this year, that he doesnt lose all 11 and cost us dearly?

you see things the way you want to see them.. are you saying that fumbling is ok because he only cost us one game?

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by imbondz



What was that again Tatonka?

post padder! :lol:

[THATHURMANATOR]

Yeah and last year WYS was trying to run Henry out of town for his fumbling! LOL

[imbondz]

Originally posted by Tatonka


post padder! :lol:


Geek :lol:

[WG]

Originally posted by imbondz


Then I want to say this again.

Did he "play outstanding in those games" bondz???

If you really think so, then again, we have a discrepancy here between reality and perception.

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by imbondz



Geek :lol: :eek:

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Tatonka
wys.. henry's fumbles cost us one game LAST YEAR.. how do you know when he drops the ball 11 times this year, that he doesnt lose all 11 and cost us dearly?

you see things the way you want to see them.. are you saying that fumbling is ok because he only cost us one game?

answer me wys.

[imbondz]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


Did he "play outstanding in those games" bondz???

If you really think so, then again, we have a discrepancy here between reality and perception.

So, You're telling me Bledsoe played like crap but got his team to the SuperBowl in '97. Hmmmm...

[WG]

Originally posted by Tatonka
wys.. henry's fumbles cost us one game LAST YEAR.. how do you know when he drops the ball 11 times this year, that he doesnt lose all 11 and cost us dearly?

you see things the way you want to see them.. are you saying that fumbling is ok because he only cost us one game?

Well T,

Let's see, since you apparently left school sometime in middle school, :D, since 7 of 11 fumbles were in games that we won, that leaves only 4 fumbles. If you take a closer look at those, you'll see that no one scored off of them or otherwise set up a TD that lost us the game other than the Denver game.

That leaves 3 games. One was the 37-31 Jets game in which Henry fumbled once but we got the ball back right away. Drew threw 2 INTs in that game, both setting up Jet TDs if I'm not mistaken!

The second was in the 27-17 loss to the Pats in which Drew threw 4 INTs, one for a TD by N.E., another setting up a FG.

The third, was the G.B. game in which Drew also set up the only Pack TD w/ a FUM or INT and a game in which Drew had 4 TOs to Henry's 1.

So you see, if you can get past your "rah-rah" Bledsoe's a god mentality, then perhaps you'll be able to see things realistically.

I get a little tired of being asked this nonsense over and over again. I also get a little tired of getting dragged into these Bledsoe arguments that you guys start.

There you have it however. So if you are gonna be hard on Henry, then perhaps you had better being quite a bit harder on Drew, b/c afterall, his TOs, 18 of them in 7 losses, seem to be quite significant to me.

But then again, hey, if Drew's playoff performances you consider to be good, then who's to say that averaging 2.6 TOs/game isn't just dandy as well.

Please excuse me if I don't reply to this thread anymore. If you all want to rehash Drew's inadequacies, then feel free. It's not what I feel like discussing however, especially with a bunch of people who can't even be honest about the facts.

[Tatonka]

once again.. you wasted your time typing all that crap.. and didnt answer the question.. you are the master at that.. rofl..

i didnt ask you what drew did.. i am not even talking about that.. you obviously cant comprehend a simple question.. i thought it was very simple.. but obviously you dont.. i dont speak special ed, so i dont know how else to ask you..





Originally posted by Wys Guy


Well T,

Let's see, since you apparently left school sometime in middle school, :D, since 7 of 11 fumbles were in games that we won, that leaves only 4 fumbles. If you take a closer look at those, you'll see that no one scored off of them or otherwise set up a TD that lost us the game other than the Denver game.

That leaves 3 games. One was the 37-31 Jets game in which Henry fumbled once but we got the ball back right away. Drew threw 2 INTs in that game, both setting up Jet TDs if I'm not mistaken!

The second was in the 27-17 loss to the Pats in which Drew threw 4 INTs, one for a TD by N.E., another setting up a FG.

The third, was the G.B. game in which Drew also set up the only Pack TD w/ a FUM or INT and a game in which Drew had 4 TOs to Henry's 1.

So you see, if you can get past your "rah-rah" Bledsoe's a god mentality, then perhaps you'll be able to see things realistically.

I get a little tired of being asked this nonsense over and over again. I also get a little tired of getting dragged into these Bledsoe arguments that you guys start.

There you have it however. So if you are gonna be hard on Henry, then perhaps you had better being quite a bit harder on Drew, b/c afterall, his TOs, 18 of them in 7 losses, seem to be quite significant to me.

But then again, hey, if Drew's playoff performances you consider to be good, then who's to say that averaging 2.6 TOs/game isn't just dandy as well.

Please excuse me if I don't reply to this thread anymore. If you all want to rehash Drew's inadequacies, then feel free. It's not what I feel like discussing however, especially with a bunch of people who can't even be honest about the facts. :stupid:

[Tatonka]

it is funny too.. cuz you accuse me of being a rahrah bledsoe fan.. but in reality i am not.. i dont even disagree with all that you say..

but your too full of yourself to read my ****** question and answer it.. without posting a g d book that still doesnt answer my question..

then you run..

i will ask one more time..

1. how do you know when henry drops the ball 11 times this year, that he doesnt lose all 11 and cost us dearly?

2. are you saying that fumbling is ok because he only cost us one game?

and i want to add this question..
3. why do you think that henry can fix his fumbling problem, but drew can fix his int problem?

NONE OF THESE REQUIRE STATS POSTED IN THE RESPONSE...

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


Please excuse me if I don't reply to this thread anymore. If you all want to rehash Drew's inadequacies, then feel free. It's not what I feel like discussing however, especially with a bunch of people who can't even be honest about the facts.

run forrest run.. especially after accusing gameboy.. that is funny stuff.

[WG]

It's all in there T. I answered your question hook, line, and sinker. Don't blame me if you can't read...

That's the problem with you and others. You only skim thru things and then say I didn't answer your questions. Nice try. Any moron can see the reality of the situation.

Does 11-7 throw you off? The answer's 4. If you want to discuss it further PM me and I'll call you or you call me. Apparently you are having difficulty with written answers to your questions.

[THATHURMANATOR]

You should call him Tatonka!

[Tatonka]

i dont read long posts you type.. sorry..

it is real easy wys... do it again.. just for me because i am stupid i guess..

tpye
1- and put the answer to question one in this spot

type
2- and put the answer to question two in this spot

type
3- and put the answer to question three in this spot..

or just cut and past the SHORT answer to those questions that you burried in all that drivel above.

or just run and dont answer them.. whatever..

[THATHURMANATOR]

WYS last year you were ALL OVER Henry for his fumbles. Now you don't seem to have any problems with them? Whats the deal with that?

[Tatonka]

i am not going to argue with wys on the phone at 1:45 in the morning right before bed.. sorry.. maybe some other time.

[THATHURMANATOR]

I like Bledsoe!

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
WYS last year you were ALL OVER Henry for his fumbles. Now you don't seem to have any problems with them? Whats the deal with that?

he will just say, "see above attached book that i have typed.. the answer is in there.. you must find it.. "

:rolleyes:

[THATHURMANATOR]

Come on T! You can conference me in too!

[Tatonka]

nite gang.. i cant debate this anymore.. i will see if wys answered my 3 simple questions in the morning..

[Tatonka]

lol thurman.. if it is the middle of the day, or a friday night.. that is one thing.. but i am up too late with this stuff already.. nite all.

[THATHURMANATOR]

nite man!

[WG]

G'nite T!!!

BTW, I think I may see the disconnect here. Check me if I'm wrong, but are you saying "what if Henry fumbles 11 times this season?" The one upcoming?

If so, my answer in short will be let's wait and see if that happens. Regardless, asking that in light of last year's occurrences, i.e., Travis only put the ball down once, possibly twice that cost us. Drew laid the ball down or up 18 times in 7 losses. He only had one TO in the other 9 games against mostly weaker teams.

So I wouldn't know what to say about pure hypotheticals. We can say "if" about a lot of things. But to address your concerns, if Henry puts the ball down 11 times and 6 or 7 of them result in game-changing losses w/o Drew throwing any INTs or having any FUMs that contribute to the loss, then we can look at that at that time.

In the meantime, since you guys have gotten Drew involved, the faact is that he did cost us 7 games due largely or entirely to his 18 TOs in those games. So arguing reality w/ hypotheticals is comparing apples to oranges.

As well, if Henry has 11 fumbles along with 2,000 yards and 20 TDs, then that would be different than him having 11 fumbles, 1,000 yards and 8 TDs, right. Either way, we'll have to wait and see. All I'm saying is that if you and others are going to get on Henry for fumbling in key games and costing us wins, don't you think that it's fair that other players, including Bledsoe, are held to the same standard? Or do we have a special Drew standard? And I think we do, really.

But we'll have to wait and see. My question back at you would be what if he doesn't fumble more than 4, 5, or 6 times and has a near 2,000 yard rushing season and over 2,000 total yards with 20+ TDs? Then what?

[Captain gameboy]

Just to clear up some points from your summation.
Nobody ran away from the discussion. It was going nowhere. My point was that I didn't consider his performance coming off the bench in AFC championship game, on the road as "horrendous," and reviewing the play by doesn't make the point that it was "horrendous." You evidently do hold that view-great. Neither does his past performance for another team have the slightest thing to do with how he might play as a Bill in a future playoff game, in my view.
It wasn't us that brought Bledsoe into it, as you claim. It was you. A re-posting of the quote for the third time in this thread is unnecessary.
Slander? Maybe you meant libel. Either way, that didn't happen. Nothing remotely close to that happened.

[Earthquake Enyart]

In a playoff game, I'd rather give the ball to a stud top 3 pick back than to a guy who I am worried about fumbling. TD must feel that way too.

[Tatonka]

wys.. you finally saw what i was saying..

i guess basically what you have stated is that bledsoe performed horribly in past playoff performances, and killed us alot last season with his turnovers. you are also saying that while henry fumbled 11 times, he only lost 8 or so, and only one really cost us the game (the denver one i assume)... but when you speak of henry, you have stated a couple times that you think henry will cure the fumbling thing... or you say he is a great back, w/ great numbers despite the playcalling, he should be incredible this year and then in fine print it says as long as he doesnt fumble.

i just dont understand why you cant extend that same courtesy to bledsoe.. i think henry will be fine this year.. i also think that bledsoe will be better since the games wont (or shouldnt) depend on his arm.. just because your saying he played bad in the past doesnt mean that he will play bad in the future.. which is the same way i feel about henry.. just because he fumbled last season, doesnt mean that he cant correct that too.

that was my only point.

[justasportsfan]

Wys and gameboy, does this mean you both won't be holding hands in any games anymore? :jk:

Wys, Drew played 1 year under Gilbride(1 year) and it seems like you're ready to write him off as the worst qb the bills ever got. I know that's not your intention , but your constant degrading of Drew seems to imply that. Especially since you were insisting that we keep Rob over Drew despite 4 years of misery and Drew had only one year. For that alone people like myself keep wondering why you are so convinced Drew is a bust? Your choice of qb hasn't been all that.

I know your love for Rob (back then)does not support your agrument of whether Drew is a playoff bust or not. It's just that you and a few others blasted us for not liking Rob and called us negative because of it. You are definitely getting a more harsh treatment than those who didn't like Rob because Drew has outperformed Rob in 1 year.

BTW, Flutie was better than RoB :snicker:

[THATHURMANATOR]

Lets hope that they both cut down on the turnovers next year and we win the Superbowl and leave it at that!