The New Power Structure at OBD

[ghz in pittsburgh]

Two years of Levy at the helm, then the new structure. We are really seeing it now with all this flurry of moves: Dockery's release, TO signing, trading of Peters, pending move of ST ace Parrish ...

My point is Levy would not approve any of the moves above.

So who's making all these football decisions? Brandon? Jauron? Modrak?

As much as I noticed Brandon's more assertive style after a year on the job, I still find it hard to believe he'll be that bold to make so many big moves on his own. Jauron obviously had to sign off on these moves. It just shows that as much a player's coach as he's known, when push comes to shovel, he'll act. I still think maybe Modrak's voice carries a little more weight in the structure now. The fact of the matter is that this coming draft carries more importance to this organization for a lot of people and he probably assured many of them that he can provide answers to them if they give him tools (i.e. draft picks).

What do you guys think? I've never seen the Bills making so many unusual moves this close to the draft.

[HHURRICANE]

The Bills could have kept Dockery and Peters and worked on the defense. So these "moves" look more about saving money. How did we get better?

Dockery graded poorly but didn't have any problem getting signed elsewhere.

[jamze132]

The Bills could have kept Dockery and Peters and worked on the defense. So these "moves" look more about saving money. How did we get better?

Dockery graded poorly but didn't have any problem getting signed elsewhere.
Dockery sucked.

[Tatonka]

The Bills could have kept Dockery and Peters and worked on the defense. So these "moves" look more about saving money. How did we get better?

Dockery graded poorly but didn't have any problem getting signed elsewhere.

um.. what are you still doing here? :dink:

[kernowboy]

Dockery was awful and nowhere near deserving of $7m a season. He went back to his old team.

Peters, if he turned up, would be overweight and not too bothered so we have gained by losing an unpopular distraction.

Whilst many dislike Schobel, his sack totals are impressive, and teams will be more concerned about him than dealing with Kelsay/Denney. I am interested to seeing how Stroud/Schobel work together.

It was clear to all that the Offensive Line was less than the sum of its parts, and if you have an overpaid line underachieving you shake it up. Only Butler and Walker earnt their wage packet last year.

[Mitchell55]

The Bills could have kept Dockery and Peters and worked on the defense. So these "moves" look more about saving money. How did we get better?

Dockery graded poorly but didn't have any problem getting signed elsewhere.


Dockery played worse than any OG ive ever seen last year. He also had the help of former PB LT Peters. Also, Peters didnt want to be here and seemed to skip the last game of each season hes been here. He was a distraction and none of our players liked him. He wouldnt return Docs calls, rumor that Stroud sayed he was a problem, Whitner had the facebook post.

[sdbillsfan2]

Dockery played worse than any OG ive ever seen last year. He also had the help of former PB LT Peters. Also, Peters didnt want to be here and seemed to skip the last game of each season hes been here. He was a distraction and none of our players liked him. He wouldnt return Docs calls, rumor that Stroud sayed he was a problem, Whitner had the facebook post.



HHurricane... How dare you post that . Always consult our very own 15 year old football wizard. By 18 he'll be taking over as NFL commissioner . You obviously know squat about football HH . lol j.k


Actually I really don't see how we got better as of today either ,but I''l wait to see how this plays out .

[HHURRICANE]

Dockery played worse than any OG ive ever seen last year. He also had the help of former PB LT Peters. Also, Peters didnt want to be here and seemed to skip the last game of each season hes been here. He was a distraction and none of our players liked him. He wouldnt return Docs calls, rumor that Stroud sayed he was a problem, Whitner had the facebook post.

Were you like 7 when we had our line in for Bledsoe. Dockery was better than anything we've had in the last 7 years. Name the better guy smarty.

[JohnnyGold]

Dockery played worse than any OG ive ever seen last year. He also had the help of former PB LT Peters. Also, Peters didnt want to be here and seemed to skip the last game of each season hes been here. He was a distraction and none of our players liked him. He wouldnt return Docs calls, rumor that Stroud sayed he was a problem, Whitner had the facebook post.


what did whitner say about him?

[kernowboy]

what did whitner say about him?

Words to the effective of how great it was to have an extra first round pick and expressing no disappointment that Peters had left, the inference being that Peters was not popular on the team.

[Nighthawk]

The Bills could have kept Dockery and Peters and worked on the defense. So these "moves" look more about saving money. How did we get better?

Dockery graded poorly but didn't have any problem getting signed elsewhere.

He signed with his old team that is known for throwing money around foolishly. Nice try.

[TigerJ]

I think the philosophical perspective in evidence at OBD is, "why pay big bucks for poor production?" That's why they wouldn't pay Peters after giving up so many sacks last season. That's why they cut Dockery. I think that's playing a role in the rumored decision to shop Kelsay. He didn't produced when he started most of last season. He would have a lot less playing time this season with Schobel coming back presumably healthy, so his production would be even less. Whether your production is going to be better, worse, or about the same from those positions next season is debateable, but Buffalo's going to be paying a lot less to get it. It's something of a risky strategy. These guys were all pretty much known quantities. Their presence seemed like it would produce just more mediocrity, but at least you got something out of them. If you have a lot of turnover, especially among starters, you have a chance to get much better, but you could also be a lot worse. I almost think that's better than continuing to settle for mediocrity. In that sense, I kind of like what's happening.

[LifetimeBillsFan]

I see Ralph Wilson, Jr.'s mitts all over several of these moves.

First of all, let's put them all into a little real world context: Wilson may have gotten a big chunk of cash from the Toronto deal last year, but we have just gone through a stock market crash that has seen the market lose half of its value, if not more. If Warren Buffett and other big money men have lost a considerable portion of their fortunes, it is not at all unreasonable to think that Ralph has taken a significant hit as well. Having started out as one of the poorer members of the millionaires/billionaires' club that own the NFL's franchises, if this were, indeed, the case, it could well mean that Wilson, who has been very concerned about being able to pass on his wealth to his heirs, may not have the kind of ready cash at hand to run the Bills that he had anticipated a year ago.

While I can buy the explanation given that the Dockery move was made to give the team more money with which to make a deal with Jason Peters, the fact that they cut Dockery and still didn't come up with enough cash to satisfy Peters leads me to two conclusions: 1.) that Ralph is hurting (in relative terms) for ready cash; and 2.) that Wilson has decided that he doesn't want to pay underachieving veteran players out of the cash that he has left.

The Dockery move fits both of those criteria. The fact that they did not give Peters the kind of money that Philly gave him does as well. Putting Kelsay and Parrish on the block would be consistent, in each instance, with the second of these two.

It really isn't hard to see an old guy, who owns a football team that hasn't made the playoffs in nine years and wants to win before he dies and has just taken a big hit in the stock market, saying to himself, "That's it! I've had it! I'm tired of overpaying these underachieving slobs. I can lose just as easily with rookies as I can with these guys. Other teams have won with rookies playing key roles, so there is no reason that my team can't as well. If a guy is making big money on my team and hasn't performed, he's gone! If I can't trust a guy to play up to his contract, I'm not going to give him a big-money, long-term deal without some assurances that he is going to perform!"

Ralph agreed to give Dockery a ton of money. And, in his second year, Dockery didn't perform. Ralph gave Peters a nice contract for an unproven guy after he stepped in for Williams at RT and, when he no longer liked the money that he was getting, Peters didn't perform. Wilson gave Kelsay a big contract extension because he was a team leader, but he hasn't performed or led the team anywhere. He did the same with Parrish when his rookie contract was about to expire and Parrish still hasn't learned how to run routes properly or become the consistent game-changer he was supposed to be.

So, in tough economic times, why pay these guys?

Ralph probably feels that, if he gets some draft picks, he may be able to get as much or more production out of some hungry rookies and cheap veterans. And, that will leave him with more cash that he can use to re-sign some of the better performing players on his team whose contracts are going to expire after this season--which isn't going to be cheap or easy to do.

And, of course, Brandon, Overdorff, Jauron, Modrak, et al. take their marching orders from Ralph and what they do is going to reflect what he wants.

So, I see Ralph as being the one who is really calling the shots here. And, I see the current economic situation as playing a major role in what he is doing.

[Historian]

LTBF you are spot on with your analysis.

(as usual)

[kernowboy]

They once had an instance of a famous commentator on British TV commenting on Premiership Football who made the legendary claim:

"You win nothing with kids"

and that team was criticised for not buying experienced players to replace those who had left instead using youngsters coming up through the academy.

That team immediately won the Premiership

:)

[HHURRICANE]

I see Ralph Wilson, Jr.'s mitts all over several of these moves.

First of all, let's put them all into a little real world context: Wilson may have gotten a big chunk of cash from the Toronto deal last year, but we have just gone through a stock market crash that has seen the market lose half of its value, if not more. If Warren Buffett and other big money men have lost a considerable portion of their fortunes, it is not at all unreasonable to think that Ralph has taken a significant hit as well. Having started out as one of the poorer members of the millionaires/billionaires' club that own the NFL's franchises, if this were, indeed, the case, it could well mean that Wilson, who has been very concerned about being able to pass on his wealth to his heirs, may not have the kind of ready cash at hand to run the Bills that he had anticipated a year ago.

While I can buy the explanation given that the Dockery move was made to give the team more money with which to make a deal with Jason Peters, the fact that they cut Dockery and still didn't come up with enough cash to satisfy Peters leads me to two conclusions: 1.) that Ralph is hurting (in relative terms) for ready cash; and 2.) that Wilson has decided that he doesn't want to pay underachieving veteran players out of the cash that he has left.

The Dockery move fits both of those criteria. The fact that they did not give Peters the kind of money that Philly gave him does as well. Putting Kelsay and Parrish on the block would be consistent, in each instance, with the second of these two.

It really isn't hard to see an old guy, who owns a football team that hasn't made the playoffs in nine years and wants to win before he dies and has just taken a big hit in the stock market, saying to himself, "That's it! I've had it! I'm tired of overpaying these underachieving slobs. I can lose just as easily with rookies as I can with these guys. Other teams have won with rookies playing key roles, so there is no reason that my team can't as well. If a guy is making big money on my team and hasn't performed, he's gone! If I can't trust a guy to play up to his contract, I'm not going to give him a big-money, long-term deal without some assurances that he is going to perform!"

Ralph agreed to give Dockery a ton of money. And, in his second year, Dockery didn't perform. Ralph gave Peters a nice contract for an unproven guy after he stepped in for Williams at RT and, when he no longer liked the money that he was getting, Peters didn't perform. Wilson gave Kelsay a big contract extension because he was a team leader, but he hasn't performed or led the team anywhere. He did the same with Parrish when his rookie contract was about to expire and Parrish still hasn't learned how to run routes properly or become the consistent game-changer he was supposed to be.

So, in tough economic times, why pay these guys?

Ralph probably feels that, if he gets some draft picks, he may be able to get as much or more production out of some hungry rookies and cheap veterans. And, that will leave him with more cash that he can use to re-sign some of the better performing players on his team whose contracts are going to expire after this season--which isn't going to be cheap or easy to do.

And, of course, Brandon, Overdorff, Jauron, Modrak, et al. take their marching orders from Ralph and what they do is going to reflect what he wants.

So, I see Ralph as being the one who is really calling the shots here. And, I see the current economic situation as playing a major role in what he is doing.

Like I said many times this team is run to make money not win championships.

We had no salary cap danger by keeping these players so we get rid of them for holes and unknowns. I have guys in my company that make more than they should be but we pay them because we know the alternative will be alot worse. One day the right guy comes in and than you can relesase him or fire him. Instead the Bills throw our young talent to the wolves and expect miracles out of them.

[Night Train]

Sorry but Ralph used to grab Sporting News Draft magazines off the shelf in the 1960's to draft his players. You folks give him far more credit than he's due.

Brandon runs things by him but Ralph isn't up on the current personnel in this league. He had no idea who Tom Donahoe was, 2 days before he hired him. He usually promoted someone from his the Detroit Insurance office to fill key positions in the front office. I'm sure Jauron has a fallback position promised to him there, to fill out his contract if fired from his head coaching job

Finall say ? Yes. Actual ideas beyond the financials. Few and far between.

[BigZ]

[quote=LifetimeBillsFan]I see Ralph Wilson, Jr.'s mitts all over several of these moves.

First of all, let's put them all into a little real world context:


Pretty good analysis. Thanks for the insight and opinions.

[trapezeus]

LTBF is on to something, but i think more than it being about his personal losses in investments. i can't make the logic of it out, but it also has to do with the uncapped year next year.

The bills actually are profitable on a per game basis. the teammakes money after all expenses on a game by game basis. So i find it hard to believe he's going to just say, "we're hurting financially. cut the players."

Rookies, especially 2 first rounderes, aren't cheap.

[ghz in pittsburgh]

I found it very hard to believe that old Ralph needs to cut cost at Bills players for anything else. Remember NFL has by-laws and the contract with players specifies the percentage of revenue must be spent on players.

Conspiracy aside, I found Ralph not on the unwilling to spend money category, but simply don't know how to run an NFL team side. The Rooney family here in Pittsburgh lives on the Steelers and yet they are successful in running the team.

I don't know who's most decisive guy among Brandon, Modrak, and Jauron. But it's decidedly a new thinking, a new way of running things. You see the difference when Donahoe was here. And you see the difference when Marv was here. Without a towering figure (re Donahoe, Marv), maybe the true power lies between Modrak and Jauron.

BTW, Chris Brown on his blog tries to lead us to believe that this organization is very high on Bell, implying they traded Peters feeling they might have somwhat a security in him.

[Buckets]

The Bills could have kept Dockery and Peters and worked on the defense. So these "moves" look more about saving money. How did we get better?

Dockery graded poorly but didn't have any problem getting signed elsewhere.


GOD! GET OVER IT ALREADY!!!!!

[LifetimeBillsFan]

Perhaps some of you may have misunderstood some of what I wrote--probably because I've been around so long that I just assumed that everyone who follows the Bills is familiar with how Ralph Wilson has let his personality and "world view" influence personnel decisions with the Bills over the years. My bad!!!

I don't think that it is a purely economic or cost-cutting issue, although I do think that economics influenced how it played out.

1.) I think that it is fair to say that the Bills have ALWAYS been an investment for Ralph Wilson. One of probably many that he has and has had. I think that at times he has looked to draw money out of this investment--and, perhaps, this may even be one of those times--but I don't think that this is or has been his primary purpose here.

I think that his primary purpose over the last few years has been not to have to put any more money into the team.

Ralph knows that, if he can hang onto the team until he dies, his family will be well taken care of after he is gone from the proceeds of the sale of the team. And, he wants to preserve that, if he can, and if the team can win a Super Bowl before he dies, so much the better.

Winning a Super Bowl with the Bills would be a nice way for Wilson to cap off his career and his life, but, for him, it isn't necessary or the be-all-and-end-all. He wants to preserve and, hopefully (from his perspective), increase the value of his investment without having to sink any more money into it from other sources.

Basically, he is looking for it to be a self-sustaining proposition. Which happens to be the same basis on which many other sports franchises are run on around the world: for example, the Arsenal soccer team, one of the most successful in the English Premier League, is run entirely on what the club produces during the season--if they don't make money, they do not spend money to acquire high-paid players the way that other teams that have billionaire owners who put large sums into their teams every year do (yet, Arsenal are considered one of the Big Four teams in the EPL thanks to shrewd management). So, it can be done and done successfully on the field.

2.) I think that at times Ralph has been willing to "advance" money from his other resources to help pay for up-front bonuses that have to be paid when signing players in the NFL. But, I think that, when he has done that, he did it with the knowledge that that money would come back to him from the money that the team makes and it would essentially be a short-term loan to the team.

Where I think that the economic crisis has impacted Ralph and the Bills is that his other investments have probably lost value and, if the money that the Bills got from the Toronto deal was also invested in the markets, it is possible that a substantial portion of that Toronto money has also been lost as well.

If that is the case, then, Wilson may be in a position where he cannot put up a lot of bonus money up-front without further reducing what he has in his other investments and advancing it to the team, which may no longer have as much of the money from the Toronto deal available to pay him back.

That would explain why he, through the team's front office, felt the need to cut Dockery in order to help pay Peters (if they could have gotten him to agree to take close to what they were willing to offer him).

Otherwise, why cut Dockery? And, why be even more limited in free agency than in previous recent years before the economic crisis?

That having been said, however, the economics don't fully explain what the Bills have done. That's why there has to be another factor involved. And, why this next factor--which I didn't fully explain--is so important:

3.) Over the years Ralph Wilson has fired coaches, front office personnel and gotten rid of players--regardless of how well they did their jobs--because he didn't like their attitudes or felt that they had somehow insulted him, the team or "his dignity" in some way.

Those of us who have followed the team from its beginning can cite numerous examples of this. So, why think that "an old dog can learn new tricks"? If anything, it is entirely possible that Ralph has gotten even more crotchey, cranky and "set in his ways" as he has gotten older!

It wouldn't be surprising for a young guy who had suddenly lost a substantial portion of his money to lose patience with those working for him who were not producing up to their pay level. So, it would be even less surprising if an old man, looking the prospect of dying in the not too distant future, to have even less patience.

Especially an old man with the track record of Ralph Wilson!

If he could get so upset with Lou Saban, Bobby Moore (aka Ahmad Rashad), Chuck Knox, Bill Polian, etc.--all of whom produced--that he would get rid of them, we should hardly be shocked if, at this stage of his life, he would not want to pay Peters or continue to pay Dockery, Parrish or Kelsay. Especially under the current financial conditions.

Those of us who have seen Ralph Wilson operate the Bills for the last 50 years know that he has been more than willing to pay people who have kissed his butt or done things the way he wanted, even if they were incompetent in the positions that they filled with the team (H.Johnson, K.Stephenson, etc.). He has even been willing to pay pretty decent money for talent at times. But, Ralph can get ticked off or rubbed the wrong way by people very easily and will cut them loose from the team without regard to the impact that it has on the field and without thinking twice.

And, I am suggesting that that may well be what has been happening here. He likes Jauron, Modrak and Brandon, so he has kept them. But, Dockery's poor performance last year and Peters' ingratitude towards the team may very well have ticked Wilson off to the point where he has said, "To hell with them!" And, having done so, he may well have also decided that he is tired of overpaying guys like Parrish and Kelsay who haven't produced, even after having been given a big raise and contract extension.

4.) Now I'm not saying that any of this bodes well for the Bills on the field this season. In fact, Ralph's history suggests that it won't. I'm just trying to understand and explain why things may have happened and be happening as they have.

I won't pretend to say that the Bills have a great owner or have been a well run team (now or through most of their 50 year history). But, I do believe that there are reasons why most people do things: even a moron will tell you that he had a reason for why he did something (although it may be a perfectly moronic reason!). When it comes to the Bills, I make an effort to try to understand the reasons behind a lot of the things that they do. That doesn't mean that I agree with the actions that they have taken in every instance or that I would have chosen to do things that way even if those reasons still pertained.

One thing that I have learned from following the Bills as long as I have is that Ralph Wilson has had a lot more say in how the team has been run than he lets on and that, as much as money, personal factors have played a significant role in quite a number of the more baffling personnel moves that the team has made over the years.--with Mr. Wilson's personality having a lot to do with how those things have played out. And, in this instance, I do not believe that this can be discounted any more than the current economic situation.

[kernowboy]

Great analogy LTBF.

I'm in England, and my team have spent twice as much as Arsenal (who incidently I despise with an almost unreasonable passion) but who have never qualified for the Champions League.

Arsenal have succeeded by finding the right coach. No-one had heard of Wenger before he was chosen, but fans gave him some time and he came good.

An interesting analogy is the case of Nicolas Anelka and Thierry Henry. Anelka was poached from Paris St Germain, and became a star in the starting lineup. He immediately started to ***** about his contract, but was immediately sold to Real Madrid. With that money Wenger signed Henry who had failed at Juventus, much to the derision of the fans yet Henry became one of the greatest strikers ever far outstripping Anelkas achievements - echos of Peters?

What Wenger has done, is brought through young players. When a young player has gotten ready to start he has dispensed with the veteran irrespective of how well that veteran was performing. Initially he was criticised by fans but now they just say he knows what he's doing. Whilst I know it is different in the NFL, essentially it is like releasing or trading an experienced starter because the rookie you drafted the previous year is ready. And the team becomes self building and self sustaining but always in the how reaches of the league.

We have seen it in the NFL and in the NHL with teams like the Red Wings. Whilst there are huge doubts held by the fans about the front office, it is possible that the team can start the process, and very very quickly build a very good roster without having to make big free agent signings. And before we deride the Front Office, Wenger has made some poor signings too, but overall the pluses have outweighed the minuses

I still hate Arsenal though.

[Historian]

If he could get so upset with Lou Saban, Bobby Moore (aka Ahmad Rashad), Chuck Knox, Bill Polian, etc.--all of whom produced--that he would get rid of them, we should hardly be shocked if, at this stage of his life, he would not want to pay Peters or continue to pay Dockery, Parrish or Kelsay. Especially under the current financial conditions.

....or Rauch....or Cousineau...or Butler...or Cribbs...or Phillips...or Butler....or....