Accurately beating up on Whaley [Archive] - BillsZone.com

Arm of Harm

12-19-2016, 09:47 AM

Tim Graham again :

http://buffalonews.com/2016/12/18/roster-data-shows-bills-gm-doug-whaley-not-building-roster-creating-nfls-biggest-hole/

If anyone reading this thread is planning on reading just one article about Doug Whaley, this would be the one article to read. Graham makes a devastatingly effective case that Whaley needs to go. If one believes his article to be true--which 100% of it is--then it's easy to conclude that firing Whaley is more of a priority than getting rid of Rex Ryan.

Let's say the Bills fire Rex but keep Whaley. They start interviewing potential replacements for Rex, including some top shelf head coaching talent. Imagine yourself in the shoes of one of those top shelf head coaches. You look at the Bills' roster and you see the same failure to draft good talent that Tim Graham pointed out. You see that Whaley has failed to obtain a real quarterback. You see that Whaley wasn't fired, even though he clearly should have been. You read about the time Whaley has (wisely) invested in schmoozing with the Pegulas. You realize that due to the organizational politics of the Bills, the head coach will be fired if the team fails to reach expectations. Whaley's and Brandon's jobs will of course be perfectly safe. You have every reason to believe that Whaley will be as incompetent going forward as he'd been in the past. You have no intention of being scapegoated as atonement for his sins. When the Bills call you and ask you to interview, you tell them thanks but no thanks. That's the way you'd expect a typical top shelf candidate to respond when a dysfunctional organization/incompetent front office asks him in for an interview.

If the better head coaching candidates aren't willing to come here because of Whaley, then that means your candidate pool will consist primarily of guys who are desperate. Guys who would accept a head coaching offer from almost anyone. Guys like Rex Ryan.

EDS

12-19-2016, 11:18 AM

Wow. Whaley really has been terrible. Total lack of vision.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 11:29 AM

If anyone reading this thread is planning on reading just one article about Doug Whaley, this would be the one article to read. Graham makes a devastatingly effective case that Whaley needs to go. If one believes his article to be true--which 100% of it is--then it's easy to conclude that firing Whaley is more of a priority than getting rid of Rex Ryan.

Let's say the Bills fire Rex but keep Whaley. They start interviewing potential replacements for Rex, including some top shelf head coaching talent. Imagine yourself in the shoes of one of those top shelf head coaches. You look at the Bills' roster and you see the same failure to draft good talent that Tim Graham pointed out. You see that Whaley has failed to obtain a real quarterback. You see that Whaley wasn't fired, even though he clearly should have been. You read about the time Whaley has (wisely) invested in schmoozing with the Pegulas. You realize that due to the organizational politics of the Bills, the head coach will be fired if the team fails to reach expectations. Whaley's and Brandon's jobs will of course be perfectly safe. You have every reason to believe that Whaley will be as incompetent going forward as he'd been in the past. You have no intention of being scapegoated as atonement for his sins. When the Bills call you and ask you to interview, you tell them thanks but no thanks. That's the way you'd expect a typical top shelf candidate to respond when a dysfunctional organization/incompetent front office asks him in for an interview.

If the better head coaching candidates aren't willing to come here because of Whaley, then that means your candidate pool will consist primarily of guys who are desperate. Guys who would accept a head coaching offer from almost anyone. Guys like Rex Ryan.

Seriously. There's no coming back from this one. This is a dagger to the heart.

Tim Graham is on a roll. This is really smart, fact/stat based analysis and the conclusions are pretty irrefutable.

But Pegula and Brandon will ignore it. Unfortunately, Terry shares Ralph Wilson's most annoying characteristic. They both would rather lose with people with whom they're personally comfortable than win with volatile, talented, opinionated winners, like Saban, Polian, Butler and others. Apparently Whaley and Brandon give the Pegulas a great big case of the warm fuzzies, which insulates the GM and Team President form any type of accountability.

DraftBoy

12-19-2016, 12:05 PM

Jesus...if that underclassmen scouting thing is true then that alone is grounds for dismissal.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 12:33 PM

If anyone reading this thread is planning on reading just one article about Doug Whaley, this would be the one article to read. Graham makes a devastatingly effective case that Whaley needs to go. If one believes his article to be true--which 100% of it is--then it's easy to conclude that firing Whaley is more of a priority than getting rid of Rex Ryan.

Let's say the Bills fire Rex but keep Whaley. They start interviewing potential replacements for Rex, including some top shelf head coaching talent. Imagine yourself in the shoes of one of those top shelf head coaches. You look at the Bills' roster and you see the same failure to draft good talent that Tim Graham pointed out. You see that Whaley has failed to obtain a real quarterback. You see that Whaley wasn't fired, even though he clearly should have been. You read about the time Whaley has (wisely) invested in schmoozing with the Pegulas. You realize that due to the organizational politics of the Bills, the head coach will be fired if the team fails to reach expectations. Whaley's and Brandon's jobs will of course be perfectly safe. You have every reason to believe that Whaley will be as incompetent going forward as he'd been in the past. You have no intention of being scapegoated as atonement for his sins. When the Bills call you and ask you to interview, you tell them thanks but no thanks. That's the way you'd expect a typical top shelf candidate to respond when a dysfunctional organization/incompetent front office asks him in for an interview.

If the better head coaching candidates aren't willing to come here because of Whaley, then that means your candidate pool will consist primarily of guys who are desperate. Guys who would accept a head coaching offer from almost anyone. Guys like Rex Ryan.

This post is almost as damning as Tim Graham's column.

Historian

12-19-2016, 02:24 PM

There was no chance Bon Jovi was going to own the Bills but what if Donald Trump did?

Brandon would be knocking down the door to slobber all over his knob.

Much the way the republican leadership is right now.

cookie G

12-19-2016, 03:04 PM

If anyone reading this thread is planning on reading just one article about Doug Whaley, this would be the one article to read. Graham makes a devastatingly effective case that Whaley needs to go. If one believes his article to be true--which 100% of it is--then it's easy to conclude that firing Whaley is more of a priority than getting rid of Rex Ryan.

Let's say the Bills fire Rex but keep Whaley. They start interviewing potential replacements for Rex, including some top shelf head coaching talent. Imagine yourself in the shoes of one of those top shelf head coaches. You look at the Bills' roster and you see the same failure to draft good talent that Tim Graham pointed out. You see that Whaley has failed to obtain a real quarterback. You see that Whaley wasn't fired, even though he clearly should have been. You read about the time Whaley has (wisely) invested in schmoozing with the Pegulas. You realize that due to the organizational politics of the Bills, the head coach will be fired if the team fails to reach expectations. Whaley's and Brandon's jobs will of course be perfectly safe. You have every reason to believe that Whaley will be as incompetent going forward as he'd been in the past. You have no intention of being scapegoated as atonement for his sins. When the Bills call you and ask you to interview, you tell them thanks but no thanks. That's the way you'd expect a typical top shelf candidate to respond when a dysfunctional organization/incompetent front office asks him in for an interview.

If the better head coaching candidates aren't willing to come here because of Whaley, then that means your candidate pool will consist primarily of guys who are desperate. Guys who would accept a head coaching offer from almost anyone. Guys like Rex Ryan.

Based on what he's done since Ryan came aboard, I'd see him as someone who can be manipulated by a coach with an agenda.

But that's the problem.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 03:38 PM

Based on what he's done since Ryan came aboard, I'd see him as someone who can be manipulated by a coach with an agenda.

But that's the problem.

Really? Because Whaley is said to be the source of these leaks. He's a weasel who's backstabbing the current coach (not that Rex needs any help greasing his own skids). This whole notion of "This teams has top level talent that's not being used correctly" is a giant pile of horse dung. And this column totally refutes it.

cookie G

12-19-2016, 04:30 PM

Really? Because Whaley is said to be the source of these leaks. He's a weasel who's backstabbing the current coach (not that Rex needs any help greasing his own skids). This whole notion of "This teams has top level talent that's not being used correctly" is a giant pile of horse dung. And this column totally refutes it.

Yeah...really.

Because only a complete moron would want to rebuild a defense that ranked 4th in yards and in points. And it is especially moronic for a guy who helped build the defense.

There is a finite amount of cap space and a finite amount of draft picks.

At last count, there are now 6 new starters on defense.

The past 5 highest draft selections over the past 2 years went to rebuilding this defense.

All because the coach they hired can only coach one way.

Do I blame him for the EJ pick?

Nope. He literally didn't have a QB, due ot the gross negligence of Bumbling Buddy...and he took the best of a bad class.. Idk..maybe he should have taken Tyler Bray or that guy who fizzled out in Tampa...Glennon or something.

Do I blame him for the year after?

Oh yeah. When you use 2 no. 1's to pick a WR when the QB you've taken has question marks is a dubious move at best.

Do I blame him for not drafting a QB in the past 2 years (Cardale Longshot nothwithstanding)?

Yeah, I do.

When Rex was crying, "I want a hamburger, no a cheeseburger, I want a milkshake..."

Someone should have been saying.."You'll get nothing and like it".

Turf

12-19-2016, 05:06 PM

I knew a long time ago that both Whaley and Ryan suck. The question is, why doesn't ownership. My repeated opinion is Pegula treats theses guys as friends and it blinds his judgment. as well as the fact that he feels like he's running the team with their help. He needs to get a football guru and get out of the picture because he is really bad at making football or hockey decisions.

sudzy

12-19-2016, 05:26 PM

Whaley's inability to run a draft should have been exposed when he trade the farm for a WR (with no QB on the team) that he called a "once in a generation" player and he turns out to not even be in the top 5 WRs in that draft.

EDS

12-19-2016, 05:29 PM

Yeah...really.

Because only a complete moron would want to rebuild a defense that ranked 4th in yards and in points. And it is especially moronic for a guy who helped build the defense.

There is a finite amount of cap space and a finite amount of draft picks.

At last count, there are now 6 new starters on defense.

The past 5 highest draft selections over the past 2 years went to rebuilding this defense.

All because the coach they hired can only coach one way.

Do I blame him for the EJ pick?

Nope. He literally didn't have a QB, due ot the gross negligence of Bumbling Buddy...and he took the best of a bad class.. Idk..maybe he should have taken Tyler Bray or that guy who fizzled out in Tampa...Glennon or something.

Do I blame him for the year after?

Oh yeah. When you use 2 no. 1's to pick a WR when the QB you've taken has question marks is a dubious move at best.

Do I blame him for not drafting a QB in the past 2 years (Cardale Longshot nothwithstanding)?

Yeah, I do.

When Rex was crying, "I want a hamburger, no a cheeseburger, I want a milkshake..."

Someone should have been saying.."You'll get nothing and like it".

Glennon is someone the Bills should be considering when evaluating whether to keep Tyrod Taylor.

Mace

12-19-2016, 05:47 PM

Jesus...if that underclassmen scouting thing is true then that alone is grounds for dismissal.

That was pretty significant. It also indicates each draft is not linked to the next in terms of developing a longer term program, and their scouting isn't comprehensive or flexible in general besides the potential for ignorance on specific players. It's like a philosophy of the scouting staff starting over fresh every year if they haven't been paying attention to underclassman.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 05:54 PM

Do I blame him for the EJ pick?

Nope. He literally didn't have a QB, due ot the gross negligence of Bumbling Buddy.....

Ohhhh, I see. You prefer fairy tales to the truth.

Carry on with your bliss.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 05:57 PM

cookie G

12-19-2016, 05:59 PM

Ohhhh, I see. You prefer fairy tales to the truth.

Carry on with your bliss.

And the truth is?

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 06:22 PM

And the truth is?

Google is your friend.

The internet is teeming with direct quotes from Doug Whaley regarding his input and role in selling EJ to Buddy Nix.

EJ was Whaley's boy from day one. The entire debacle is owned, lock, stock, barrel and bushel full of pissed-away draft choices by our current General Manager.

Here's a jump starter for you:

doug whaley on drafting EJ Manuel

"The Buffalo Bills raised plenty of eyebrows after taking EJ Manuel with the No. 16 pick in the 2013 NFL Draft, making him the first quarterback to go off the board. New general manager Doug Whaley isn't shy about taking ownership of the pick, even if he was second-in-command to Buddy Nix at the time.

"I was an integral part in the drafting process of EJ Manuel," Whaley said on NFL Network's "NFL Total Access" on Thursday. "I was the person that handled the draft process and setting up the board."

...The Bills finally seem pointed in the right direction. It now falls on Whaley's hand-picked franchise quarterback to end the longest active playoff drought in the NFL.

Arm of Harm

12-19-2016, 06:36 PM

And the truth is?
Back in the late '90s, Peyton Manning was described as "polished" and "NFL-ready." The right quarterback for a team that wanted immediate gratification. Ryan Leaf was described as "raw," not as "NFL-ready." But, supposedly, Leaf had higher "upside" because his physical tools were better than Manning's.

Over the years, other QBs described as "polished" and "NFL-ready" included Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, etc. Other QBs considered "raw" but with good "upside" due to their physical tools included Tim Tebow, J.P. Losman, etc.

So along comes E.J. Manuel, who is described as "raw" and a "project," despite having been given plenty of college snaps as the starter. Manuel ran a simplified college offense, had questions about his accuracy, and was very inconsistent in his ability to hit moving targets in stride.

When Manuel was selected as the Bills' pick, I instantly had exactly the same feeling of sports-related heartbreak as I'd had from Wide Right or from the Music City Miracle. For me, the Manuel selection was at least as bad as Music City, but not as bad as Wide Right. The Manuel pick told me two things: 1) that the Bills would be without a real quarterback for the next few years, and 2) that the Bills' front office was not better at QB talent evaluation than the more intelligent, better-informed members of our fanbase. So not only would we not have a quarterback, we were also going to be without a front office capable of evaluating QB talent. Both those realizations hit me within seconds of the Manuel pick being announced.

Perhaps there are those who feel that Manuel was forced on Whaley by a departing Nix. But all available evidence points to the fact that Whaley was 100% on board with the Manuel pick, including evidence from Tim Graham's article. In addition to the evidence Graham presented, you have the fact that Whaley went "all in" on E.J. with the Watkins selection.

This team hasn't had a quarterback since Jim Kelly. This team hasn't been to the Super Bowl since Kelly. Nothing I've seen from Doug Whaley remotely suggests the possibility that he's the right man to correct either of those two problems. This team has been making excuses for, and giving "second chances" to incompetent front office personnel for far too long. That needs to end yesterday.

cookie G

12-19-2016, 06:39 PM

Google is your friend.

The internet is teeming with direct quotes from Doug Whaley regarding his input and role in selling EJ to Buddy Nix.

EJ was Whaley's boy from day one. The entire debacle is owned, lock, stock, barrel and bushel full of pissed-away draft choices by our current General Manager.

Here's a jump starter for you:

doug whaley on drafting EJ Manuel

"The Buffalo Bills raised plenty of eyebrows after taking EJ Manuel with the No. 16 pick in the 2013 NFL Draft, making him the first quarterback to go off the board. New general manager Doug Whaley isn't shy about taking ownership of the pick, even if he was second-in-command to Buddy Nix at the time.

"I was an integral part in the drafting process of EJ Manuel," Whaley said on NFL Network's "NFL Total Access" on Thursday. "I was the person that handled the draft process and setting up the board."

...The Bills finally seem pointed in the right direction. It now falls on Whaley's hand-picked franchise quarterback to end the longest active playoff drought in the NFL.

Let's try this one more time....

1) who was on the Bills roster as QB in 2013? (The year whaley took over)

2) Who in the 2013 draft should Whaley have taken instead of EJ?

Arm of Harm

12-19-2016, 07:10 PM

Let's try this one more time....

1) who was on the Bills roster as QB in 2013? (The year whaley took over)

2) Who in the 2013 draft should Whaley have taken instead of EJ?

1) Prior to the Bills drafting Manuel, their starting quarterback had been Ryan Fitzpatrick. Ryan Fitzpatrick might well have been the best QB the Bills have had in the post-Kelly era. And yes, I realize how sad that is. Fitzpatrick was released shortly after the Bills drafted Manuel.

2) Had the Bills enjoyed the luxury of a competent front office during 2013 - 2014, they would not have taken a QB in the 2013 draft. Instead they would have drafted Derek Carr in 2014.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 07:11 PM

Let's try this one more time....

1) who was on the Bills roster as QB in 2013? (The year whaley took over)

2) Who in the 2013 draft should Whaley have taken instead of EJ?

Oh, I see. We're changing the subject now.

Ok. I wanted Mike Glennon, and i'd still take him over EJ any day of the week.

But I wouldn't stop there. I'd draft a QB every season until I found a Derek Carr.

But that's not what Whaley did. He arrogantly ignored the most important position in any sport.

That alone should get you fired. But he clearly knows better than any of us.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 07:12 PM

cookie G

12-19-2016, 08:04 PM

Oh, I see. We're changing the subject now.

mmmmm...don't think so.

Do I blame him for the EJ pick?

Nope. He literally didn't have a QB, due ot the gross negligence of Bumbling Buddy...and he took the best of a bad class.. Idk..maybe he should have taken Tyler Bray or that guy who fizzled out in Tampa...Glennon or something.

Now, to further illustrate the state of the Bills' Qb stable in 2013, for bonus credit, name the number of QB's the Bills drafted between 2007 (the year of the infamous Trent Edwards draft) and 2013. That's 5 years split between Russ and Buddy.

double bonus if you can pick the round.

Ok. I wanted Mike Glennon, and i'd still take him over EJ any day of the week.

So that's the big ***** for 2013? Mike Glennon?

But I wouldn't stop there. I'd draft a QB every season until I found a Derek Carr.

But that's not what Whaley did. He arrogantly ignored the most important position in any sport.

That alone should get you fired. But he clearly knows better than any of us.

And I said...

Do I blame him for the year after?

Oh yeah. When you use 2 no. 1's to pick a WR when the QB you've taken has question marks is a dubious move at best.

cookie G

12-19-2016, 08:07 PM

1) Prior to the Bills drafting Manuel, their starting quarterback had been Ryan Fitzpatrick. Ryan Fitzpatrick might well have been the best QB the Bills have had in the post-Kelly era. And yes, I realize how sad that is. Fitzpatrick was released shortly after the Bills drafted Manuel.

2) Had the Bills enjoyed the luxury of a competent front office during 2013 - 2014, they would not have taken a QB in the 2013 draft. Instead they would have drafted Derek Carr in 2014.

Nope, he was released before the draft, by Buddy.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/9044711/ryan-fitzpatrick-released-buffalo-bills

New coach Doug Marrone and the Buffalo Bills are moving on without Ryan Fitzpatrick, releasing the quarterback after two-plus inconsistent seasons as starter.

The team announced the move Tuesday, shortly after the NFL's free agency period opened, and a day before Fitzpatrick was due a $3 million bonus.

"We kept every possible option open right down to the wire, when we had to make a decision on whether to keep Ryan," general manager Buddy Nix said. "In the end, we had to do what we feel is best for our football team. And it was a difficult decision."

btw..the state of the Bills' QB position at the time of the draft....Tavaris Jackson.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 08:12 PM

mmmmm...don't think so.

Now, to further illustrate the state of the Bills' Qb stable in 2013, for bonus credit, name the number of QB's the Bills drafted between 2007 (the year of the infamous Trent Edwards draft) and 2013. That's 5 years split between Russ and Buddy.

double bonus if you can pick the round.

So that's the big ***** for 2013? Mike Glennon?

And I said...

I don't have the time or patience to chop all of this up, but it sounds an awful lot like you think that this is an either/or conversation about Buddy vs. Dougie.

Just because Buddy sucked, it doesn't mean that Dougie sucks any less. And the only real indicator of success in this league is playoff berths. That's a GM's job--to get you a crack at a championship.

Doug Whaley is a dismal failure, and his miserable drafting has set this organization up to fail for years.

We are no closer to solving the QB problem than when he was hired. He hasn't even come close to a solution.

Nice try on the semantics with Glennon. I clearly said Glennon, plus a QB in every draft thereafter, until the problem was solved.

But hey, you're clearly happy as hell with the status quo, so congratulations. If you're enjoying this suck, you're in for more of the same, for the foreseeable future.

Mace

12-19-2016, 08:25 PM

2) Had the Bills enjoyed the luxury of a competent front office during 2013 - 2014, they would not have taken a QB in the 2013 draft. Instead they would have drafted Derek Carr in 2014.

Was a crap class, but I think his point was more that we could have drafted Manuel as a raw project, and if he didn't look any good, drafted Carr in 2014. If Carr looked poor, Garrett Grayson in 2015, if that didn't look good, Dak Prescott in 2016.

I don't think everyone is arguing different points so much as stating them differently. Like I thought Manuel was the best 2013 possibility (yes seriously), doesn't mean he was better than a 2014 possibility. Not hitting means you try again, and affects what you do across the board.

Not trying to prove Manuel, you don't need to trade up for picks you could have used on other issues, picking Carr maybe means you don't have to draft Insertname. You aren't trying to overextend for players to bolster someone inadequate (line, wr, rb's) or trade for them, you just keep trying. That means with your other picks you aren't overfocused so much on positions to justify yourself or scheme as you are in accumulating talent.

If there was a QB we still don't have and haven't tried swinging for with a pick a year, you're not overfocusing on a position group to justify him in the case of offense, or overcompensate for him in the case of defense.

I think you're all arguing the same point differently unless I completely misread it.

cookie G

12-19-2016, 08:37 PM

Back in the late '90s, Peyton Manning was described as "polished" and "NFL-ready." The right quarterback for a team that wanted immediate gratification. Ryan Leaf was described as "raw," not as "NFL-ready." But, supposedly, Leaf had higher "upside" because his physical tools were better than Manning's.

Over the years, other QBs described as "polished" and "NFL-ready" included Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, etc. Other QBs considered "raw" but with good "upside" due to their physical tools included Tim Tebow, J.P. Losman, etc.

So along comes E.J. Manuel, who is described as "raw" and a "project," despite having been given plenty of college snaps as the starter. Manuel ran a simplified college offense, had questions about his accuracy, and was very inconsistent in his ability to hit moving targets in stride.

When Manuel was selected as the Bills' pick, I instantly had exactly the same feeling of sports-related heartbreak as I'd had from Wide Right or from the Music City Miracle. For me, the Manuel selection was at least as bad as Music City, but not as bad as Wide Right. The Manuel pick told me two things: 1) that the Bills would be without a real quarterback for the next few years, and 2) that the Bills' front office was not better at QB talent evaluation than the more intelligent, better-informed members of our fanbase. So not only would we not have a quarterback, we were also going to be without a front office capable of evaluating QB talent. Both those realizations hit me within seconds of the Manuel pick being announced.

Perhaps there are those who feel that Manuel was forced on Whaley by a departing Nix. But all available evidence points to the fact that Whaley was 100% on board with the Manuel pick, including evidence from Tim Graham's article. In addition to the evidence Graham presented, you have the fact that Whaley went "all in" on E.J. with the Watkins selection.

This team hasn't had a quarterback since Jim Kelly. This team hasn't been to the Super Bowl since Kelly. Nothing I've seen from Doug Whaley remotely suggests the possibility that he's the right man to correct either of those two problems. This team has been making excuses for, and giving "second chances" to incompetent front office personnel for far too long. That needs to end yesterday.

About the same as Wagon..

The guy takes over the draft one month after the previous year's starter was fired;
on a team with one QB on the roster (Tavaris Jackson);
that has spent a single 7th round pick on the position in the prior five years
All the while Trent Edwards was tearing up the league;
In a class that didn't have a sure fire QB;
In a class where not a single QB has done a thing...

But you'll complain about the pick.

mmhmmm

cookie G

12-19-2016, 08:45 PM

I don't have the time or patience to chop all of this up, but it sounds an awful lot like you think that this is an either/or conversation about Buddy vs. Dougie.

Just because Buddy sucked, it doesn't mean that Dougie sucks any less. And the only real indicator of success in this league is playoff berths. That's a GM's job--to get you a crack at a championship.

Doug Whaley is a dismal failure, and his miserable drafting has set this organization up to fail for years.

We are no closer to solving the QB problem than when he was hired. He hasn't even come close to a solution.

Nice try on the semantics with Glennon. I clearly said Glennon, plus a QB in every draft thereafter, until the problem was solved.

But hey, you're clearly happy as hell with the status quo, so congratulations. If you're enjoying this suck, you're in for more of the same, for the foreseeable future.

If I would have known you can't read more than one paragraph at a time, I would have broken it down into a multi-part series..a paragraph a day or somethin'

So I'll leave you in peace.

- - - Updated - - -

Was a crap class, but I think his point was more that we could have drafted Manuel as a raw project, and if he didn't look any good, drafted Carr in 2014. If Carr looked poor, Garrett Grayson in 2015, if that didn't look good, Dak Prescott in 2016.

STAY OUT OF THIS!!!

:) Merry Christmas Mace!

kscdogbillsfan1221

12-19-2016, 08:46 PM

About the same as Wagon..

The guy takes over the draft one month after the previous year's starter was fired;
on a team with one QB on the roster (Tavaris Jackson);
that has spent a single 7th round pick on the position in the prior five years
All the while Trent Edwards was tearing up the league;
In a class that didn't have a sure fire QB;
In a class where not a single QB has done a thing...

But you'll complain about the pick.

mmhmmm
i'm with you Cookie 100%. I always said that there was no good pick in 2013 and the Bills (whaley, nix, whomever) did the best that they could given the ****tiness of that class. That said, he ****ed up the next year with Watkins and no qb til Cardale.

SpikedLemonade

12-19-2016, 08:49 PM

If I would have known you can't read more than one paragraph at a time, I would have broken it down into a multi-part series..a paragraph a day or somethin'

So I'll leave you in peace.

Welcome to Hell!

Mace

12-19-2016, 09:52 PM

STAY OUT OF THIS!!!

:) Merry Christmas Mace!

Alrighty then old son, you know I can't argue with you (heh).

The very Merriest Christmas unto thee and thine.

cookie G

12-19-2016, 10:27 PM

i'm with you Cookie 100%. I always said that there was no good pick in 2013 and the Bills (whaley, nix, whomever) did the best that they could given the ****tiness of that class. That said, he ****ed up the next year with Watkins and no qb til Cardale.

Some years..there just is no QB who's going to pan out. And it is more years than just 2013.

But did you ever notice people saying, "This is a weak QB class this year, wait until next year"
And then next year comes along and the new class isn't any better?

TBH, I can't think of a single 1st round pick that we've had since the playoff drought, that was so irreplaceable, so vital to the franchise that you couldn't risk a pick on a QB. And I certainly can't think of a draft where you couldn't use at least a mid round pick on a qb.

WagonCircler

12-19-2016, 10:40 PM

If I would have known you can't read more than one paragraph at a time, I would have broken it down into a multi-part series..a paragraph a day or somethin'

So I'll leave you in peace.!

Actually, you posted the opposite. A paragraph would have been preferable to the bite size nuggets of bullchit that you posted.

I get it. You think Whaley is blameless. It's mind boggling, but it's your opinion.

It takes all kinds. Some people are just fine with losing. I've had enough of it. My 24 year old son was in Kindergarten last time we made the playoffs. I had hoped to go to a playoff game with him someday, before I die. Apparently Doug Whaley has the job security of a Supreme Court justice, so I guess I'll never have that opportunity.

Enjoy the mediocrity, Cookie. It's here for the long haul.

swiper

12-20-2016, 04:53 AM

Glennon is someone the Bills should be considering when evaluating whether to keep Tyrod Taylor.

C'mon man. He's white Tyrod Taylor at best. The Bills have to aim higher.

HHURRICANE

12-20-2016, 05:01 AM

Anyone *****ing about Pegula as the owner needs to have their head examined. It's a miracle the Bills are still in Buffalo. If Trump had bought this team they'd already be in LA.

DraftBoy

12-20-2016, 06:17 AM

Actually, you posted the opposite. A paragraph would have been preferable to the bite size nuggets of bullchit that you posted.

I get it. You think Whaley is blameless. It's mind boggling, but it's your opinion.

It takes all kinds. Some people are just fine with losing. I've had enough of it. My 24 year old son was in Kindergarten last time we made the playoffs. I had hoped to go to a playoff game with him someday, before I die. Apparently Doug Whaley has the job security of a Supreme Court justice, so I guess I'll never have that opportunity.

Enjoy the mediocrity, Cookie. It's here for the long haul.

Except he didn't say that, so I'm not sure you really get his point.

SpikedLemonade

12-20-2016, 06:43 AM

Anyone *****ing about Pegula as the owner needs to have their head examined. It's a miracle the Bills are still in Buffalo. If Trump had bought this team they'd already be in LA.

Hey, I want to win.

I want to win it all.

If you simply need a parking lot to drink on a Sunday morning, you should be brave enough not to have to have a losing NFL team as a cover/excuse.

Consider tailgating a church's parking lot.

Arm of Harm

12-20-2016, 07:15 AM

Was a crap class, but I think his point was more that we could have drafted Manuel as a raw project, and if he didn't look any good, drafted Carr in 2014. If Carr looked poor, Garrett Grayson in 2015, if that didn't look good, Dak Prescott in 2016.

I don't think everyone is arguing different points so much as stating them differently. Like I thought Manuel was the best 2013 possibility (yes seriously), doesn't mean he was better than a 2014 possibility. Not hitting means you try again, and affects what you do across the board.

Not trying to prove Manuel, you don't need to trade up for picks you could have used on other issues, picking Carr maybe means you don't have to draft Insertname. You aren't trying to overextend for players to bolster someone inadequate (line, wr, rb's) or trade for them, you just keep trying. That means with your other picks you aren't overfocused so much on positions to justify yourself or scheme as you are in accumulating talent.

If there was a QB we still don't have and haven't tried swinging for with a pick a year, you're not overfocusing on a position group to justify him in the case of offense, or overcompensate for him in the case of defense.

I think you're all arguing the same point differently unless I completely misread it.
I'd argue the following:

1) That when you use a first round pick on a QB bust, you get burned twice. Once because of the waste of a first round pick. A second time, because it will typically take several years for the front office to realize the guy is a bust. During those years the front office is unlikely to invest much in the QB position on draft day.

2) You are arguing that a team could avoid the second half of what I just wrote by drafting a new QB each year. However, that is not how a typical front office acts, and it's certainly not what Whaley actually did. I'm not saying your idea is good or bad--just that no one in the Bills' front office applied it. Whaley went all in on EJ. The Bills paid full price for the EJ bust, including wasted opportunities to draft other QBs.

3) EJ Manuel should not have been drafted before the fourth round. Any front office which thinks he's worthy of a first round pick, that he has the "it factor," cannot evaluate QB talent. Period. Nothing that's happened since the EJ draft could cause anyone to question this conclusion.

4) Desperation is not an excuse for 3).

5) Cookie G was correct to say that Ryan Fitzpatrick was released shortly before the 2013 draft, in order to avoid paying him a roster bonus. (I appreciate his correction on that.) However, I would argue that the Bills would not have released Fitzpatrick when they did, unless they thought they had a plan to replace him. Their plan was to draft Manuel. The plan to replace Fitzpatrick with Manuel emerged in large part because of Whaley's very positive pre-draft evaluation of Manuel.

6) The Bills traded down in the 2013 draft before ultimately taking Manuel. The trade down was good in that it resulted in the Kiko pick. But let's say that Manuel was a potential franchise QB--as Whaley clearly believed--and that the impressive nature of Manuel's future career was understood by multiple GMs. Had this been the case, trading down could have been an exceptionally stupid move. Some other team could have traded ahead of the Bills' new, lower position, and themselves could have drafted Manuel. (Who, under this scenario, would then have gone on to be a franchise QB.) By trading down, the Bills were acknowledging that their own draft grades for Manuel were considerably higher than the grades given him by any other team in need of a QB. They "knew" that Manuel was the answer, because they were smarter than everyone else.

Doug Whaley expressed the view that if the Manuel pick didn't work out, he'd be looking for a new job. That's exactly what should have happened. Not just because the Manuel pick failed, but because the failure could have been predicted in advance by a competent front office. The fact Whaley still has a job is absolutely astonishing.

Jimkelly12203

12-20-2016, 09:46 AM

It is astonishing that some here actually defend Whaley's record. Stunning!!!

The Jokeman

12-20-2016, 10:20 AM

It is astonishing that some here actually defend Whaley's record. Stunning!!!

If you compare Whaley to Marv Levy and Nix did as GMs, I think you'll agree that we're in a much better place.

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 10:34 AM

C'mon man. He's white Tyrod Taylor at best. The Bills have to aim higher.

Except that he's a foot taller and can see and make throws over the middle. And he doesn't have a run-first mentality, giving up after one read and taking off.

Other than that, they're exactly the same. (And by that I mean they could not be more different).

Is he the answer? Clearly he's not, but he would be a much more practical placeholder while the team searches for a franchise QB.

It's all moot, though. Whaley's staying. We're stuck in the mud until that changes.

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 10:35 AM

It is astonishing that some here actually defend Whaley's record. Stunning!!!

I think it's something akin to Stockholm Syndrome.

They've been so conditioned to rooting for a losing team that a perpetual 8-8 record feels like progress.

The Jokeman

12-20-2016, 10:52 AM

I think it's something akin to Stockholm Syndrome.

They've been so conditioned to rooting for a losing team that a perpetual 8-8 record feels like progress.

Let me ask you this. Is Tyrod Taylor better than EJ Manuel? Is LeSean McCoy better than Freddie Jackson/CJ Spiller? Is Jerome Felton better than Frank Summers? Is Sammy Watkins better than Stevie Johnson? Is Charles Clay better than Scott Chandler? Is Jordan Mills better than Erik Pears? I could continue but bottom line this roster is better than when Whaley got here and that's primarily the job of the GM. Sure he hasn't found an QB yet but he also hasn't married us to a losing QB with way he worked out Tyrod's extension so we can still and try and find a QB.

DraftBoy

12-20-2016, 12:13 PM

That was pretty significant. It also indicates each draft is not linked to the next in terms of developing a longer term program, and their scouting isn't comprehensive or flexible in general besides the potential for ignorance on specific players. It's like a philosophy of the scouting staff starting over fresh every year if they haven't been paying attention to underclassman.

Exactly.

Even when I was just writing about the draft here or running BBD, I had positional ranking lists for every year of players in college. Every year after National Signing Day, I'd take the top 500 or so HS players and create my next years list. Just to make sure I was always keeping tabs on potential prospects. I didn't do any HS scouting so those lists were just for a database of names more than anything else.

While I didn't specifically watch for underclassmen if somebody popped on tape then I'd check my database to see if there were on it. If they were I'd add a few notes and if not then I'd add them and some notes.

I didn't do any formalized rankings of players until they became juniors and by then I likely had at least a few notes on the majority of players and those I didn't have anything on I could make sure to highlight as somebody I needed to watch.

That's a pretty elementary system that I utilized just in doing draft stuff part-time. To think that the Bills aren't even thinking like that is beyond frightening.

swiper

12-20-2016, 12:44 PM

Anyone *****ing about Pegula as the owner needs to have their head examined. It's a miracle the Bills are still in Buffalo. If Trump had bought this team they'd already be in LA.

No. You are stupid.

swiper

12-20-2016, 12:46 PM

Except that he's a foot taller and can see and make throws over the middle. And he doesn't have a run-first mentality, giving up after one read and taking off.

Other than that, they're exactly the same. (And by that I mean they could not be more different).

Is he the answer? Clearly he's not, but he would be a much more practical placeholder while the team searches for a franchise QB.

It's all moot, though. Whaley's staying. We're stuck in the mud until that changes.

At the end of the day, they are exactly the same if you look at the Bills won-loss record with him.

swiper

12-20-2016, 12:47 PM

I think it's something akin to Stockholm Syndrome.

They've been so conditioned to rooting for a losing team that a perpetual 8-8 record feels like progress.

Or anyone defending Pegula, because he kept a crappy team in Buffalo. "Hey it's ok to be 7-9 every year, because the team is still in Buffalo."

Stupid is as stupid does.

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 01:10 PM

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 01:13 PM

At the end of the day, they are exactly the same if you look at the Bills won-loss record with him.

How can you look at the won loss record with Glennon as Bills QB?

All you can do is guess. And my guess is that him being able to hit on a screen pass or a slant or an open TE between the hash marks would have helped this Offense a hell of a lot more than Tyrod's spectacular looking 3 yard scrambles.

Mouldsie

12-20-2016, 01:43 PM

The only defenses I can muster with Whaley in regards to his feud with Rex and his roster is that 1) He didn't hire Rex and 2) Brandon meddles.

That said, he still has a less than ideal track record for those decisions we know were his.

Mouldsie

12-20-2016, 01:47 PM

Once I hear something along the lines of "the 2013 class turned out poor" I am done listening. I get that a lot of fans think the draft is a crapshoot but it's not. This isn't a casino situation. Any GM who treats the draft like it's a gamble would be on the streets. People on these boards were saying it was not the year to draft a QB. If the fans ran this team we would have had much more success the last 17 years than we have had with the bozos at OBD who are simply INCOMPETENT

Mouldsie

12-20-2016, 01:49 PM

Exactly.

Even when I was just writing about the draft here or running BBD, I had positional ranking lists for every year of players in college. Every year after National Signing Day, I'd take the top 500 or so HS players and create my next years list. Just to make sure I was always keeping tabs on potential prospects. I didn't do any HS scouting so those lists were just for a database of names more than anything else.

While I didn't specifically watch for underclassmen if somebody popped on tape then I'd check my database to see if there were on it. If they were I'd add a few notes and if not then I'd add them and some notes.

I didn't do any formalized rankings of players until they became juniors and by then I likely had at least a few notes on the majority of players and those I didn't have anything on I could make sure to highlight as somebody I needed to watch.

That's a pretty elementary system that I utilized just in doing draft stuff part-time. To think that the Bills aren't even thinking like that is beyond frightening.

Flat out, I think they are just dumb people.

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 01:54 PM

Flat out, I think they are just dumb people.

And that's the real problem. They're not going to magically become smart. Continuity will just perpetuate the stupid.

The Jokeman

12-20-2016, 01:59 PM

It doesn't matter, because we're just talking about incremental steps of suck.

Just because they're better, doesn't mean they're good, or that they're worth the resources that it took to acquire them.

Tyrod is better than one of the worst Abs who ever played for the Bills. B.F.D.

Is McCoy better than Marshawn Lynch? No.

Is Charles Clay much better than Scott Chandler in terms of production? No. But he's paid like a Pro Bowler. And stupid contracts like his and McCoy's put the Bills in cap hell. You can be in cap hell when you're routinely playing football deep into January, but it's not OK to be in cap hell when you're on the golf course every January.

This. Team. Sucks. That's on the GM.

I didn't bring up Lynch, that said I was against drafting Spiller back in the day as felt that leading up to the draft our best option then was Dez Bryant and keeping Marshawn and Freddie or even look to move Freddie as agree Lynch is/was a good back. It's debatable if McCoy is as good, I think he can be yet his injuries don't help make the case. In terms of Clay's salary everyone knows we made that deal to prevent the Dolphins from matching and in looking at their offense since he left I think we got the better of the deal.

Jimkelly12203

12-20-2016, 02:05 PM

If you compare Whaley to Marv Levy and Nix did as GMs, I think you'll agree that we're in a much better place.
Striving to be better than previous incompetent front office regimes is not exactly my idea of success... You don't pat yourself on the back when you're bad but at least a little better than the last guy. That's not progress. It's a loser organization at work.

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 02:38 PM

I didn't bring up Lynch, that said I was against drafting Spiller back in the day as felt that leading up to the draft our best option then was Dez Bryant and keeping Marshawn and Freddie or even look to move Freddie as agree Lynch is/was a good back. It's debatable if McCoy is as good, I think he can be yet his injuries don't help make the case. In terms of Clay's salary everyone knows we made that deal to prevent the Dolphins from matching and in looking at their offense since he left I think we got the better of the deal.

So what if you didn't bring up Lynch. You brought up recently departed players. And it doesn't matter one God damned bit to the salary cap why the Bills foolishly overspent on yet another alleged pass catcher when they clearly have no one to throw to him. A smart GM would have let the division rival Dolphins overspend on the underachieving Tight End.

Is Sammy Watkins better than Odell Beckham? Hell no. But Whaley the genius bent himself into a pretzel to acquire him, pissing away even more resources to acquire.... yet another alleged pass catcher when he clearly had no one to throw to him.

Every year we hear about what a great evaluator of Defensive talent Whaley is. Yeah? Why is it that our best Defensive player is 90 year old Kyle Williams? Our Defensive Backfield is a shambles. Our Linebackers are a raging mediocrity, and our giant, name-brand football factory splashes in the first two rounds of last year's draft are chronically injured and played 20% of a season between the two of them combined.

This team is a ****ing disaster. And it was created by Whaley.

trapezeus

12-20-2016, 04:01 PM

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 04:46 PM

what is funny about cookie and wagon arguing is that to me, they are both right. whaley isn't the sole guy to blame on this. rex was a coach who didn't get along with his last GM. and whaley is a gm who didn't get along with his last coach. who cares which one of them is wrong and which is right. if independently one of them was good enough, the team would be better and we wouldn't care. but they both stink.

whaley has crafted a russ lite persona. he gets credit for the things that work, evades the things that didn't. to me the bottom line is that good teams don't operate like this. it isn't an execution where no one knows who actually shot the fatal bullet. there is accountability and ultimately it comes to the coach when its players performance, when its coach perfomance it falls on the gm and after that ownership has to start over. but the bills never do that. they keep russ and now whaley for life. and they unabashedly seem ok stuffing this in the fans faces.

I'm in no way pro Rex. I just think he's going to be this year's scapegoat while Whaley is stabbing him in the back by selling the clueless owner (and apparently some fans) a line of BS about this team having above average talent. They absolutely do not.

The really sickening part of it is that the smoke and mirrors show that Doug and Russ put on every April with blue chip knockoffs is fooling so many people. They're shiny and new, huge names from huge schools, on draft day, but they're damaged goods. They're like buying an Armani suit from an outlet mall. They miss entire rookie seasons or large parts of them.

It's a joke. And we have to watch it play out year after year.

Mace

12-20-2016, 06:06 PM

I'd argue the following:

1) That when you use a first round pick on a QB bust, you get burned twice. Once because of the waste of a first round pick. A second time, because it will typically take several years for the front office to realize the guy is a bust. During those years the front office is unlikely to invest much in the QB position on draft day.

2) You are arguing that a team could avoid the second half of what I just wrote by drafting a new QB each year. However, that is not how a typical front office acts, and it's certainly not what Whaley actually did. I'm not saying your idea is good or bad--just that no one in the Bills' front office applied it. Whaley went all in on EJ. The Bills paid full price for the EJ bust, including wasted opportunities to draft other QBs.

3) EJ Manuel should not have been drafted before the fourth round. Any front office which thinks he's worthy of a first round pick, that he has the "it factor," cannot evaluate QB talent. Period. Nothing that's happened since the EJ draft could cause anyone to question this conclusion.

4) Desperation is not an excuse for 3).

5) Cookie G was correct to say that Ryan Fitzpatrick was released shortly before the 2013 draft, in order to avoid paying him a roster bonus. (I appreciate his correction on that.) However, I would argue that the Bills would not have released Fitzpatrick when they did, unless they thought they had a plan to replace him. Their plan was to draft Manuel. The plan to replace Fitzpatrick with Manuel emerged in large part because of Whaley's very positive pre-draft evaluation of Manuel.

6) The Bills traded down in the 2013 draft before ultimately taking Manuel. The trade down was good in that it resulted in the Kiko pick. But let's say that Manuel was a potential franchise QB--as Whaley clearly believed--and that the impressive nature of Manuel's future career was understood by multiple GMs. Had this been the case, trading down could have been an exceptionally stupid move. Some other team could have traded ahead of the Bills' new, lower position, and themselves could have drafted Manuel. (Who, under this scenario, would then have gone on to be a franchise QB.) By trading down, the Bills were acknowledging that their own draft grades for Manuel were considerably higher than the grades given him by any other team in need of a QB. They "knew" that Manuel was the answer, because they were smarter than everyone else.

Doug Whaley expressed the view that if the Manuel pick didn't work out, he'd be looking for a new job. That's exactly what should have happened. Not just because the Manuel pick failed, but because the failure could have been predicted in advance by a competent front office. The fact Whaley still has a job is absolutely astonishing.

1) I wouldn't have taken Manuel in the 1st round, maybe not the second. But I thought he was the best prospect at QB in that draft.

2) I am not a fan of Whaley, and have never defended him for his drafts. If you have an inadequate QB, and see a better possibility, you take him for a better stable of prospects, you do not try and make him better with a WR. One of the picks wasted in doing so could have been on another prospect. Drafting Manuel was a two pronged failure, they took him too high, they committed too heavily. As I stated pretty clearly in my post, this affected their board across a couple drafts. One QB pick or the Watkins trade for several that could have been used elsewhere ? I'd state definitively if you're going to airball picks, you want to minimize how many you airball, Getting Watkins to improve Manuel was airball.

3) Same thing. I've never said and I did not in my post, that Manuel should have been taken that high, because I never agreed with it.

4) Irrelevant because of my 3.

5) You're entirely forgetting the Bills signed Kolb and did not intend to start Manuel. Their plan was to replace Fitzpatrick with Kolb with Manuel in development. It flatly wasn't to start Manuel.

6) Like I said, and my past posting history if you look pack to the draft will confirm it, Manuel was taken too high and that altered other pick possibilities.

I'm the one that posted the Graham article on Whaley. I read it first. I know what it said. You're arguing things I didn't argue.

Arm of Harm

12-20-2016, 06:21 PM

Let me ask you this. Is Tyrod Taylor better than EJ Manuel? Is LeSean McCoy better than Freddie Jackson/CJ Spiller? Is Jerome Felton better than Frank Summers? Is Sammy Watkins better than Stevie Johnson? Is Charles Clay better than Scott Chandler? Is Jordan Mills better than Erik Pears? I could continue but bottom line this roster is better than when Whaley got here and that's primarily the job of the GM. Sure he hasn't found an QB yet but he also hasn't married us to a losing QB with way he worked out Tyrod's extension so we can still and try and find a QB.

I would argue that Doug Whaley is not a better GM than Butler, TD, Marv, Russ Brandon, or Buddy Nix. Nor is he worse.

You mentioned a number of players Doug Whaley has acquired. But other than Sammy Watkins, none of the players you'd mentioned were acquired via the draft. There's a reason for that: the Bills have not been better at drafting under Whaley than we'd been under any of the previous GMs I'd mentioned. If you're making the argument that Whaley is better than even one of his post-Polian predecessors, that argument must needs be justified via veteran player acquisitions. It cannot be justified by anything Whaley has done during the draft.

Charles Clay had 528 receiving yards for the Bills last season, and has 447 receiving yards this season with two games to go. Scott Chandler had 571 yards in 2012, 655 in 2013, and 497 in 2014 (his last year as a Bill). Clay has more talent than Chandler. But Chandler had a better quarterback throwing him the ball. Which leads me to my next point: Tyrod Taylor is not better than J.P. Losman, Trent Edwards, or Kelly Holcomb, and is clearly inferior to Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Whaley's veteran additions are typically better than Marv's decision to sign Peerless Price or Melvin Fowler. That much, at least, I'll give you. But many of Marv's free agent acquisitions were head-scratchingly bad even by the standards of Buffalo's post-Polian GMs. Most of our post-Polian general managers--such as TD--were better than Marv in that regard.

Also, a veteran acquisition will often look really good his first year or two with the team, only to have his bloom quickly fade. Take a guy like Mario Williams for example. At first he seemed like a game-altering addition to the Bills defense. A very good free agent acquisition. But a guy like him can get old, or become unmotivated, or cease to be a good fit for the defensive system. Most of Whaley's veteran additions haven't been here very long. We're seeing their early bloom, not necessarily what they're going to turn into over the long term. Guys like Troy Vincent and Lawyer Milloy also seemed like very good veteran additions for TD. At least initially.

This years' Bills team is 7-7, on pace for 8-8. An 8-8 record is standard-issue for a post-Polian GM. And before we blame that record on Rex Ryan, I'd point out that Ryan is neither much better nor much worse than our other post-Wade coaches have been. You look at guys like Gregggg Williams, Mike Mularkey, Dick Jauron, Chan Gailey, or Doug Marrone. Rex Ryan fits right in with guys like that. If we're achieving a standard-issue playoff drought record, with a standard-issue playoff drought coach, then to me that says that we have a standard-issue playoff drought GM. Which we do.

The Jokeman

12-20-2016, 06:54 PM

So what if you didn't bring up Lynch. You brought up recently departed players. And it doesn't matter one God damned bit to the salary cap why the Bills foolishly overspent on yet another alleged pass catcher when they clearly have no one to throw to him. A smart GM would have let the division rival Dolphins overspend on the underachieving Tight End.

Is Sammy Watkins better than Odell Beckham? Hell no. But Whaley the genius bent himself into a pretzel to acquire him, pissing away even more resources to acquire.... yet another alleged pass catcher when he clearly had no one to throw to him.

Every year we hear about what a great evaluator of Defensive talent Whaley is. Yeah? Why is it that our best Defensive player is 90 year old Kyle Williams? Our Defensive Backfield is a shambles. Our Linebackers are a raging mediocrity, and our giant, name-brand football factory splashes in the first two rounds of last year's draft are chronically injured and played 20% of a season between the two of them combined.

This team is a ****ing disaster. And it was created by Whaley.

Lynch cost us a top 15 draft pick and McCoy cost us Kiko Alonzo aka a 2nd round pick. All things considered I think McCoys a better value. Is Watkins better than Beckham? No but we both agree that Eli's a way better QB than Tyrod yet Watkins isn't a bust in the Charles Rodgers, Mike Williams level that you imply Sammy is.

Yes, I know you'll come back with but we also lost a second 1st Round pick that ended up being Cameron Erving. Is he really a difference maker? Truth be told the talent has improved immensely since Whaley arrived we used to be personally drafting in the top 12 of drafts and now in the early twenties. Whaley's made attempts to find a QB but I get it you won't be happy til we find another Jim Kelly. Truth be told the best thing that Kelly did was develop in the USFL and allow us to draft Bruce and Andre. Hell we were far from great in Kelly's first two seasons either that then allowed us to draft Wolford, Conlan, Odomes, Seals, Ballard. Trade for Bennett, Leonard Smith, add guys like Tasker, Metzelaars, John Davis and Lofton through free agency.

The Raiders rebuild with Carr were helped by adding Mack and Cooper in the draft. Signing guys like Crabtree and most of their oline and building defensive talent at LB through free agency. Yet what their bust like DJ Hayden? No GM is perfect and I'll be damned if I can't say we're not better with Whaley then we are without because again I compared the Bills team we had in place when Whaley ie Freddy and CJ when Whaley became GM in 2013 to what we have now. I can't blame Whaley the 15 years of futility before he got here as it's not fair to him. So yes, I'm as angry as you are that it looks we might not make the playoffs again this year but we sure look better on the field and on paper in terms of budget than we ever have but if you don't see it or admit it. That's all up to you.

The Jokeman

12-20-2016, 07:11 PM

I would argue that Doug Whaley is not a better GM than Butler, TD, Marv, Russ Brandon, or Buddy Nix. Nor is he worse.

You mentioned a number of players Doug Whaley has acquired. But other than Sammy Watkins, none of the players you'd mentioned were acquired via the draft. There's a reason for that: the Bills have not been better at drafting under Whaley than we'd been under any of the previous GMs I'd mentioned. If you're making the argument that Whaley is better than even one of his post-Polian predecessors, that argument must needs be justified via veteran player acquisitions. It cannot be justified by anything Whaley has done during the draft.

Charles Clay had 528 receiving yards for the Bills last season, and has 447 receiving yards this season with two games to go. Scott Chandler had 571 yards in 2012, 655 in 2013, and 497 in 2014 (his last year as a Bill). Clay has more talent than Chandler. But Chandler had a better quarterback throwing him the ball. Which leads me to my next point: Tyrod Taylor is not better than J.P. Losman, Trent Edwards, or Kelly Holcomb, and is clearly inferior to Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Whaley's veteran additions are typically better than Marv's decision to sign Peerless Price or Melvin Fowler. That much, at least, I'll give you. But many of Marv's free agent acquisitions were head-scratchingly bad even by the standards of Buffalo's post-Polian GMs. Most of our post-Polian general managers--such as TD--were better than Marv in that regard.

Also, a veteran acquisition will often look really good his first year or two with the team, only to have his bloom quickly fade. Take a guy like Mario Williams for example. At first he seemed like a game-altering addition to the Bills defense. A very good free agent acquisition. But a guy like him can get old, or become unmotivated, or cease to be a good fit for the defensive system. Most of Whaley's veteran additions haven't been here very long. We're seeing their early bloom, not necessarily what they're going to turn into over the long term. Guys like Troy Vincent and Lawyer Milloy also seemed like very good veteran additions for TD. At least initially.

This years' Bills team is 7-7, on pace for 8-8. An 8-8 record is standard-issue for a post-Polian GM. And before we blame that record on Rex Ryan, I'd point out that Ryan is neither much better nor much worse than our other post-Wade coaches have been. You look at guys like Gregggg Williams, Mike Mularkey, Dick Jauron, Chan Gailey, or Doug Marrone. Rex Ryan fits right in with guys like that. If we're achieving a standard-issue playoff drought record, with a standard-issue playoff drought coach, then to me that says that we have a standard-issue playoff drought GM. Which we do.

I agree Fitzpatrick was a better QB then Tyrod is. I'm not defending Tyrod in my argument what I am defending is the team around the QB is better. So if we can land another Fitzpatrick (or better) than we might just make the playoffs in part thanks to Whaley building a better team which again a GMs job whether it be by draft or free agency.

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 07:24 PM

Lynch cost us a top 15 draft pick and McCoy cost us Kiko Alonzo aka a 2nd round pick. All things considered I think McCoys a better value. Is Watkins better than Beckham? No but we both agree that Eli's a way better QB than Tyrod yet Watkins isn't a bust in the Charles Rodgers, Mike Williams level that you imply Sammy is.

Yes, I know you'll come back with but we also lost a second 1st Round pick that ended up being Cameron Erving. Is he really a difference maker? Truth be told the talent has improved immensely since Whaley arrived we used to be personally drafting in the top 12 of drafts and now in the early twenties. Whaley's made attempts to find a QB but I get it you won't be happy til we find another Jim Kelly. Truth be told the best thing that Kelly did was develop in the USFL and allow us to draft Bruce and Andre. Hell we were far from great in Kelly's first two seasons either that then allowed us to draft Wolford, Conlan, Odomes, Seals, Ballard. Trade for Bennett, Leonard Smith, add guys like Tasker, Metzelaars, John Davis and Lofton through free agency.

The Raiders rebuild with Carr were helped by adding Mack and Cooper in the draft. Signing guys like Crabtree and most of their oline and building defensive talent at LB through free agency. Yet what their bust like DJ Hayden? No GM is perfect and I'll be damned if I can't say we're not better with Whaley then we are without because again I compared the Bills team we had in place when Whaley ie Freddy and CJ when Whaley became GM in 2013 to what we have now. I can't blame Whaley the 15 years of futility before he got here as it's not fair to him. So yes, I'm as angry as you are that it looks we might not make the playoffs again this year but we sure look better on the field and on paper in terms of budget than we ever have but if you don't see it or admit it. That's all up to you.

We got Marshawn as a rookie. We got McCoy with a lot of wear on the tread. He'll perform at this level for another year, at best.

And that other pick wouldn't have been Cameron Erving here.

Sammy is a bust in terms of production. Sure, it's mostly because of missed time due to injuries, but that's part of the game. Regardless of the reasons, the bottom line is that he hasn't been worth one of those first round picks, much less two. It was a monumentally stupid deal.

You can't just say **** like "Truth be told, the talent level has improved immensely since Whaley arrived" when there's no basis for it in fact. That's only your perception. Talent wins. This team doesn't, because Whaley drafts players who don't even stick with the team. Your comparison to the 90's Bills is totally meaningless. The talent acquired by Polian was a minor miracle, and Doug ****ing Whaley couldn't tie Polian's shoes. Polian is possibly the greatest GM in NFL history. Whaley is a hack who has never accomplished anything in this league. Comparing the state of the Bills when Whaley arrived to the state of the Bills when Polian arrived ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT predict similar results. That's just stupid.

What the hell does the Raiders history have to do with the Bills? There's no comparison. Who is the Bills' Carr? Who is the Bills' Mack? The Bills have plenty of DJ Haydens. But no stars. Like I said earlier, the best player on the team is Kyle Williams.He was here 5 years before Whaley.

Your fantasizing about what the Bills might become has no connection to reality. Reality is 17 years without playoffs, the last five of which were overseen by Whaley. And this team is no better for Whaley having been here. They're likely to finish 8-8. If that's what your measuring stick tells you is successful, that's just sad.

Mace

12-20-2016, 08:09 PM

Your fantasizing about what the Bills might become has no connection to reality. Reality is 17 years without playoffs, the last five of which were overseen by Whaley. And this team is no better for Whaley having been here. They're likely to finish 8-8. If that's what your measuring stick tells you is successful, that's just sad.

It's always about what they might become if injured guys are healthy, and a shallow roster can maintain offensive and defensive schemes that aren't good enough to be maintained. The mighty running game can't beat passers the D can't stop.

We always theoretically have talent (if only they were healthy !) for ineffective schemes that couldn't be effective starters anywhere else in more workable schemes.

The reality to me anyway, is that we aren't getting better, but manage with great effort to stay mediocre in a league where teams actually improve.

WagonCircler

12-20-2016, 10:28 PM

It's always about what they might become if injured guys are healthy, and a shallow roster can maintain offensive and defensive schemes that aren't good enough to be maintained. The mighty running game can't beat passers the D can't stop.

We always theoretically have talent (if only they were healthy !) for ineffective schemes that couldn't be effective starters anywhere else in more workable schemes.

The reality to me anyway, is that we aren't getting better, but manage with great effort to stay mediocre in a league where teams actually improve.

Not only that, but this guy is actually trying to imply that since Polian and Whaley started with similarly talented roster, they're sure to end up with similarly talented rosters. That's just bat-poop crazy.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 05:34 AM

Not only that, but this guy is actually trying to imply that since Polian and Whaley started with similarly talented roster, they're sure to end up with similarly talented rosters. That's just bat-poop crazy.

What I'm implying is Whaley has a better collection of players than we had in 2013. I'm also show casing that Polian had to build the team outside of Kelly to turn things around. I mean you want to say the Bills wouldn't take Cameron Erving with the pick we gave the Browns for Watkins yet ultimately that's what we gave up. I mean if you want to revise history what if Polian never takes an injured RB out of Oklahoma State in the 1988 draft? Do the 90s Bills ever happen?Back to reality would you rather we kept Kiko over trading for McCoy? Again Whaley wasn't replacing Lynch when he became Lynch, he was replacing Jackson/Spiller.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 05:54 AM

What I'm implying is Whaley has a better collection of players than we had in 2013. I'm also show casing that Polian had to build the team outside of Kelly to turn things around. I mean you want to say the Bills wouldn't take Cameron Erving with the pick we gave the Browns for Watkins yet ultimately that's what we gave up. I mean if you want to revise history what if Polian never takes an injured RB out of Oklahoma State in the 1988 draft? Do the 90s Bills ever happen? Back to reality would you rather we kept Kiko over trading for McCoy? Again Whaley wasn't replacing Lynch when he became GM, he was replacing Jackson/Spiller.

swiper

12-21-2016, 06:24 AM

Watkins has done nothing to write home about yet. For any fan to be holding that up as a good pick by the GM is stupid.

Meanwhile Beckham has become a star.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 06:34 AM

Watkins has done nothing to write home about yet. For any fan to be holding that up as a good pick by the GM is stupid.

Meanwhile Beckham has become a star.
To be fair would Beckham have the same success with Tyrod as his QB compared to Eli? I doubt it. Kudos to Beckham though he's been better than Sammy at avoiding injuries.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 09:26 AM

Watkins has done nothing to write home about yet. For any fan to be holding that up as a good pick by the GM is stupid.

Meanwhile Beckham has become a star.

I'd go so far as to say that Watkins, given his inability to stay on the field, was a failed pick even if just one first rounder was used on him. He has talent, sure. But he's clearly frail, and playing in the NFL doesn't make you healthier. It's only going to get worse.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 10:03 AM

I'd go so far as to say that Watkins, given his inability to stay on the field, was a failed pick even if just one first rounder was used on him. He has talent, sure. But he's clearly frail, and playing in the NFL doesn't make you healthier. It's only going to get worse.

and nothing during his NCAA career would warrant to think he was a health risk. Listen, I was on your side when the trade first went down as thought we gave up way too much for Watkins as didn't expect him to have an immediate impact and didn't see WR as such a big need but then we traded Moulds and Mike Williams didn't live up to expectations and Sammy proved me wrong. Yet if look at what the Browns ended up with the picks we gave up we did better in the deal. and sure we can play "perfect scenario" if we drafted Beckham in Round 1 and then QB X in Round 1 of 2015 but truth is no guaranteeing that would happen. I mean if Whaley ends up taking Bridgewater instead of Carr are you still calling him an inept GM? since Bridgewater hasn't played as well as Carr and might have a career ending injury?

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 10:16 AM

Not Moulds, Stevie Johnson. blech.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 11:46 AM

and nothing during his NCAA career would warrant to think he was a health risk. Listen, I was on your side when the trade first went down as thought we gave up way too much for Watkins as didn't expect him to have an immediate impact and didn't see WR as such a big need but then we traded Moulds and Mike Williams didn't live up to expectations and Sammy proved me wrong. Yet if look at what the Browns ended up with the picks we gave up we did better in the deal.

This is where your connection with reality, sanity and logic go completely off the rails.

What Cleveland did with the picks a absolutely ZERO to do with what the picks might have been used for here. They could have been bundled for any number of things, including a pick for a real QB, or to trade up for Kahlil ****ing Mack. Guess who the pick after Sammy was? Kahlil ****ing Mack.

Cleveland is as horrible an organization as Buffalo. You can't judge the value of picks based on their mistakes.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 12:41 PM

This is where your connection with reality, sanity and logic go completely off the rails.

What Cleveland did with the picks a absolutely ZERO to do with what the picks might have been used for here. They could have been bundled for any number of things, including a pick for a real QB, or to trade up for Kahlil ****ing Mack. Guess who the pick after Sammy was? Kahlil ****ing Mack.

Cleveland is as horrible an organization as Buffalo. You can't judge the value of picks based on their mistakes.
Okay here's the reality for you, had the Bills not traded up for Watkins reports are we would have drafted Eric Ebron with our initial first rounder. So with no Watkins or another WR on the roster likely to replace him odds are we use the pick we gave Cleveland and draft Nelson Agholor or Breshad Perriman. Which might have freed up some cap space because we wouldn't sign Clay for a RT but not 100% we have a better team as a result. As again you're working off a perfect world scenario and as much as like to think it's possible, I'd venture it wouldn't end up the way you want.

I mean you want to complain about missing Mack, where's the lament for us taking Jim Kelly over Dan Marino as I could argue that you put Marino in place of Kelly during the Super Bowl era we might have won at least one of them.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 03:01 PM

Okay here's the reality for you, had the Bills not traded up for Watkins reports are we would have drafted Eric Ebron with our initial first rounder. So with no Watkins or another WR on the roster likely to replace him odds are we use the pick we gave Cleveland and draft Nelson Agholor or Breshad Perriman. Which might have freed up some cap space because we wouldn't sign Clay for a RT but not 100% we have a better team as a result. As again you're working off a perfect world scenario and as much as like to think it's possible, I'd venture it wouldn't end up the way you want.

I mean you want to complain about missing Mack, where's the lament for us taking Jim Kelly over Dan Marino as I could argue that you put Marino in place of Kelly during the Super Bowl era we might have won at least one of them.

You don't get to make up your own reality. You state this is a fact. Here's a reality for you: IT'S NOT A FACT. It's speculation, on your part, and you're a Doug Whaley fan, which calls your sanity into question.

The point is, no sane person can claim that Sammy Watkins' production is equal to the resources spent to acquire him. There are mountains of evidence to back this up. First of all, it's insane to make that kind of deal on a WR--I don't care if it's Jerry Rice. Even the best WRs don't affect a game the way a QB or an elite pass rusher like Kahlil Mack or Von Miller or Bruce Smith. Then when you add to it the fact that there was a horrendous QB in place, it might be the dumbest draft choice in Bills history.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 03:58 PM

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 04:08 PM

I can't even debate with you if you're now calling Watkins/EJ the worst pick in team history. Al Cowlings, Erik Flowers, Aaron Maybin are easily worse picks IMHO. You want to dismiss me "making up history" and what are you doing when lament we didn't draft Beckham or trade down for Carr?

No they're not worse. Not one of them had two first rounders spent on them. Have someone explain what I wrote. Given the risk/reward scenario and the subsequent number of games missed to injury, and the fact that spending like that when you have a chump at QB is moronic, it may very well have been the worst pick in Bills history.

Cowlings, Flowers, Maybin, Patulski, Losman, those are swings and misses. They happen. But when you gamble two first rounders and a fourth on a ****ing WR, you should pay with your job.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 04:19 PM

No they're not worse. Not one of them had two first rounders spent on them. Have someone explain what I wrote. Given the risk/reward scenario and the subsequent number of games missed to injury, and the fact that spending like that when you have a chump at QB is moronic, it may very well have been the worst pick in Bills history.

Cowlings, Flowers, Maybin, Patulski, Losman, those are swings and misses. They happen. But when you gamble two first rounders and a fourth on a ****ing WR, you should pay with your job.

And how can you say without hind sight the other 1st Round pick we gave up in 2015 would secure us the QB we need? Again you crap all over Whaley for EJ and Watkins. If you look back without knowledge of what they and the alternatives became it's hard to argue we could have done better.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 04:27 PM

And how can you say without hind sight the other 1st Round pick we gave up in 2015 would secure us the QB we need? Again you crap all over Whaley for EJ and Watkins. If you look back without knowledge of what they and the alternatives became it's hard to argue we could have done better.

It doesn't matter. It's like paying $500,000 for a $250,000 house--and when better houses were available for $250,000. You can't piss all over the $250,000 you would have saved by not being a complete idiot--ESPECIALLY when the $500,000 house is a massive disappointment that you can't even live in for 50% of the days you've owned it.

But your moronic contention is that the extra $250,000 is valueless because the seller (let's call him Cleveland) pissed it away on hookers and booze.

That's just stupid. The fact is, you not only pissed away double the amount that you need to pay, but you did so on a house that you can only visit for 3 days a week.

Mouldsie

12-21-2016, 04:42 PM

lol @ "well we would have taken Ebron if we stayed" as a line of defense for the trade.... well if Whaley loved Ebron so much that's another poor mark on his legacy

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 04:45 PM

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 04:49 PM

lol @ "well we would have taken Ebron if we stayed" as a line of defense for the trade.... well if Whaley loved Ebron so much that's another poor mark on his legacy

And again your using hindsight to make your judgement, fact is Ebron ended up 1 pick after our initial pick so hardly a bad pick if are reimagining things as they went on then and not post fact.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 05:18 PM

And with your example we would have bought the 250k house on Beckham and the other 250k on another house sight unseen as again we have no knowledge of what that extra first would have netted us. Also the first house isn't guaranteed the same return in investment since it wasn't maintained/decorated by the same group it is under now.

Unsurprisingly, you TOTALLY miss the point. You don't need another house. You invest that money into something that will give you a better return (like using on a QB like Carr the next season or package it to move up and get a generational talent like Mack).

What you're missing, among other things, is that Whaley already idiotically paid double. What I'm talking about now is a smart buyer, who grabbed an amazing house in a great neighborhood (Odell Beckham Jr), so now he can sit back, with that extra $250,000 (unused 1st round draft pick) and wisely package it or use it as part of a plan to invest that money on something that will give you a solid return on investment.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 07:45 PM

Unsurprisingly, you TOTALLY miss the point. You don't need another house. You invest that money into something that will give you a better return (like using on a QB like Carr the next season or package it to move up and get a generational talent like Mack).

What you're missing, among other things, is that Whaley already idiotically paid double. What I'm talking about now is a smart buyer, who grabbed an amazing house in a great neighborhood (Odell Beckham Jr), so now he can sit back, with that extra $250,000 (unused 1st round draft pick) and wisely package it or use it as part of a plan to invest that money on something that will give you a solid return on investment.
Fine instead of buying another house with the extra 250k in your example we could have bought something "else".

Yeah because everyone knows that the 19th overall pick in the 1st Round always turns out to be a great player we could have gotten who/what?

Carr was taken in the same draft as Watkins, Mack and Beckham. So guess you're suggesting we should have done the "Losman" move and moved up to take him? But as preposed earlier what if we did that and instead ended up with a better prospect and got Beckham and Bridgewater? Would you be happy with that? Or doesn't this fit your ideology cuz Bridgewater got hurt and/or didn't play as well as Carr when he got hurt.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 07:53 PM

Fine instead of buying another house with the extra 250k in your example we could have bought something "else".

Yeah because everyone knows that the 19th overall pick in the 1st Round always turns out to be a great player we could have gotten who/what?

Carr was taken in the same draft as Watkins, Mack and Beckham. So guess you're suggesting we should have done the "Losman" move and moved up to take him? But as preposed earlier what if we did that and instead ended up with a better prospect and got Beckham and Bridgewater? Would you be happy with that? Or doesn't this fit your ideology cuz Bridgewater got hurt and/or didn't play as well as Carr when he got hurt.

There are hundreds of possibilities. But the only one that really happened is the only one that matters, and that was the horrendous gaffe by Whaley. A complete and total failure. He should have been fired last year. He absolutely should be fired this year.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 08:02 PM

There are hundreds of possibilities. But the only one that really happened is the only one that matters, and that was the horrendous gaffe by Whaley. A complete and total failure. He should have been fired last year. He absolutely should be fired this year. Exactly my point of the hundred of possibilities and most likely none of them would have landed us Beckham and Carr which to me the best combination that would have been significantly better than we are right now. That's all I've been trying to say.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 08:04 PM

Exactly my point of the hundred of possibilities and most likely none of them would have landed us Beckham and Carr which to me the best combination that would have been significantly better than we are right now. That's all I've been trying to say.

You're dead wrong. Solutions half as convoluted could have gotten us both. And clearly could have gotten us Mack.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 08:08 PM

You're dead wrong. Solutions half as convoluted could have gotten us both. And clearly could have gotten us Mack.

Fine we trade up and get Mack instead of Watkins. Then we most likely don't re-sign Hughes and where's that leave us at WR and QB in your scenario? As in the trade up for Mack we still lack the 1st Rounder in 2015.

Mace

12-21-2016, 08:18 PM

Thing is too, same as they thought Kevin Kolb would allow Manuel time on the pines, then took Watkins to bolster Manuel, then got Cassel, but then got Taylor who unexpectedly won the job. They added McCoy, probably figuring to bolster Manuel again or at least Cassel, with a running attack then added Clay figuring they probably had whichever QB to throw the ball.

With Watkins and Clay, Harvin, even Reggie Bush, they were thinking they were bolstering a dynamic offense that had a passing dimension that isn't there.

It's a plan that ignores the reality of previous steps that didn't work, but chugs on assuming they did. Then this year, they keep on going, stocking up some vet minimum quality defense players, figuring the offense steps worked as they were supposed to, but not paying attention that they aren't. That's why Whaley perhaps concludes he gave Ryan the players that should have worked, because he wasn't paying attention to the results of the steps that weren't working, he followed the plan and it's the coaches fault it didn't work. Not the inadequate players, and hardly his fault the coach was feeble.

Boot him.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 08:23 PM

It could be debated that cutting Travarius Jackson a few days before Kolb's injury could have been a costly mistake too.

Mace

12-21-2016, 08:33 PM

It could be debated that cutting Travarius Jackson a few days before Kolb's injury could have been a costly mistake too.

Or having better rubber mats. Kolb's injury was like the finger of destiny, I mean that never happens. I wasn't fond of Kolb nor Jackson, but geez. Once you have a problem though, compounding it never works well.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 08:38 PM

It's a plan that ignores the reality of previous steps that didn't work, but chugs on assuming they did..

This is known as the "Chasing Your Tail" style of management.

Fails. Every. Time.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 08:39 PM

Or having better rubber mats. Kolb's injury was like the finger of destiny, I mean that never happens. I wasn't fond of Kolb nor Jackson, but geez. Once you have a problem though, compounding it never works well. As you eluded Kolb was not intended to be a long term answer but instead a place holder while we tried to develop on the bench. I just wonder if letting Jackson holding the fort would have helped EJ but sadly we'll never know.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 08:45 PM

This is known as the "Chasing Your Tail" style of management.

Fails. Every. Time.

You remind me a lot of myself when I was still bitter about management a few years ago as used that exact term with way we'd draft, move, draft RBs. Maybe it's because I've seen more wins I'm naive and/or less bitter. Yet to me the current edition of Bills feels better than the early 2000s.

- - - Updated - - -

This is known as the "Chasing Your Tail" style of management.

Fails. Every. Time.

You remind me a lot of myself when I was still bitter about management a few years ago as used that exact term with way we'd draft, move, draft RBs. Maybe it's because I've seen more wins I'm naive and/or less bitter. Yet to me the current edition of Bills feels better than the early 2000s.

Mace

12-21-2016, 08:59 PM

As you eluded Kolb was not intended to be a long term answer but instead a place holder while we tried to develop on the bench. I just wonder if letting Jackson holding the fort would have helped EJ but sadly we'll never know.

It might have, but the weird thing too was that the Bills ended up with Manuel, Thad Lewis, and Jeff Tuel. Lewis was Taylor Lite, Tuel was a pocket passer, and Manuel was in the middle.

Marrone/Hackett came in with a thought to Kgun, they said so. Then waffled through run-Manuel, no don't run you got hurt, throw, no don't throw, then cycled through Lewis (hm, Taylor Lite, theme for GM ?) and Tuel, ended up the following year in pocket plodding Orton (savvy pro personnel work again if you can't draft), before changing gears with a new staff to work with the same Manuel, a better Lewis in Taylor, and a better Cassel than Tuel. Those guys clearly aren't the same type of QB that you intend to supply to the philosophy of a coach, even a bad one. That's all over the place talent selection.

Well if raw guy doesn't work, we have runner and pocket passer guys. That should give a coach options. Well he doesn't want options that don't suit his idea, which he told you and should know.

I don't know what could have happened if Kolb didn't fall down, Hackett didn't think he was fine being his own QB coach, then hiring a guy who helped Stafford regress, before hiring Wildcat Lee to QB coach a QB you don't want to throw.

But I do know, a coach and GM should be on the same page and the variety of selections, raw, pocket, runner, just wasn't consistent with anything but waffling and thinking it should work because a selection was provided without attention to the quality of them.

WagonCircler

12-21-2016, 09:07 PM

You remind me a lot of myself when I was still bitter about management a few years ago as used that exact term with way we'd draft, move, draft RBs. Maybe it's because I've seen more wins I'm naive and/or less bitter. Yet to me the current edition of Bills feels better than the early 2000s.

- - - Updated - - -

You remind me a lot of myself when I was still bitter about management a few years ago as used that exact term with way we'd draft, move, draft RBs. Maybe it's because I've seen more wins I'm naive and/or less bitter. Yet to me the current edition of Bills feels better than the early 2000s.

Or maybe you're just fine with suck.

The Jokeman

12-21-2016, 09:31 PM

Or maybe you're just fine with suck.

Herein where the problem exists. To me the Browns and Jaguars and 49ers are suck. Then the next level includes the Bears and Jets. The Bills fall in the next level with the Ravens and Colts. Then we have the Falcons and chiefs and Cowboys and finally elite like the Broncos and Patriots.

Arm of Harm

12-22-2016, 03:08 PM

You don't get to make up your own reality. You state this is a fact. Here's a reality for you: IT'S NOT A FACT. It's speculation, on your part, and you're a Doug Whaley fan, which calls your sanity into question.

The point is, no sane person can claim that Sammy Watkins' production is equal to the resources spent to acquire him. There are mountains of evidence to back this up. First of all, it's insane to make that kind of deal on a WR--I don't care if it's Jerry Rice. Even the best WRs don't affect a game the way a QB or an elite pass rusher like Kahlil Mack or Von Miller or Bruce Smith. Then when you add to it the fact that there was a horrendous QB in place, it might be the dumbest draft choice in Bills history.
I'd argue that it would be worth using two first round picks on a WR, if that receiver was Jerry Rice, Larry Fitzgerald, or A.J. Greene. You look at the fact that the Arizona Cardinals came very close to winning the Super Bowl. They were fairly run-of-the-mill on defense. Their running game was so-so. Their offensive line was anchored by a Bills castoff, whose name I forget. If you look for special players on that team, you're talking about their QB Kurt Warner, and about their receiving corps; which consisted of Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin. If you take away those three guys the rest of their team was fairly standard-issue. I'll grant that Kurt Warner was the most important of the three; and that the other two would largely have been wasted if they'd had a mediocre QB throwing them the ball. Of that there is no question. But I'd also point out that Tom Brady's stats look a lot better in years when he's throwing to guys like Randy Moss or Gronkowski, than when his primary target is Reche Caldwell. By that same token Warner is going to be more effective throwing to Fitzgerald and Boldin than he'd be without those guys.

Sammy Watkins' development has been hindered by inadequate, substandard quarterback play, and by his own injuries. Even if he could stay healthy, and even if he was catching passes from Tom Brady or Jimmy Garoppolo, Watkins still wouldn't be in the same category as A.J. Greene or Larry Fitzgerald. Nevertheless, Watkins is one of the very, very few building block players Doug Whaley has obtained. Guys who will still be playing at a high level five years from now. Watkins would be a fool to stay in Buffalo after his rookie contract expires, because we don't have a quarterback. So he's more likely to be a building block player for someone else than for us.

Unless there's someone I'm forgetting, Watkins is the highlight of Doug Whaley's draft day successes. The fact that Watkins has thus far failed to live up to his draft position tells you everything you need to know about Whaley's drafts.

trapezeus

12-23-2016, 08:22 AM

The Jokeman

12-23-2016, 08:58 AM

for a guy who supposedly is safe, on GR this morning, he sounded a lot less confident. "we are moving forward to Miami game" for questions he didn't want to answer. He didn't exactly sound safe himself. I do feel bad for someone like whaley or bylsma when they are asked point blank questions about under performers, because you really can't say much. you know what you want to do, but you can't be throwing people under the bus in these positions. on the other hand, it is very frustrating to hear someone dress up a turd.

This is why I will never take a job in management as there are some individuals that just can't be motivated no matter what you try and it turns out a reflection on you and not the person. As personally if you want to strive better it has to come somewhere from within yet run in to too many people that are just lazy and rather continually place the blame on something/someone else.

WagonCircler

12-23-2016, 10:52 AM

I'd argue that it would be worth using two first round picks on a WR, if that receiver was Jerry Rice, Larry Fitzgerald, or A.J. Greene. You look at the fact that the Arizona Cardinals came very close to winning the Super Bowl. They were fairly run-of-the-mill on defense..

I would respectfully disagree. Putting aside the fact that your example is one in which a WR was the final piece of the puzzle (which is an entirely different scenario), if you just look at the number of plays in which each position is involved, it's pretty clear cut that QB is far and away the position that most controls the outcome of every game. Second to QB is a counterpoint to the opposing QB (See Miller, Von. Also see Smith, Bruce or White, Reggie...).

There's a hierarchy of importance of positions. Just look at which positions are paid the most. By and large, they're not Wide Receivers. That's not to say that they're not important of valuable. Just not "two firsts and a fourth" valuable.

Arm of Harm

12-23-2016, 02:49 PM

I would respectfully disagree. Putting aside the fact that your example is one in which a WR was the final piece of the puzzle (which is an entirely different scenario), if you just look at the number of plays in which each position is involved, it's pretty clear cut that QB is far and away the position that most controls the outcome of every game. Second to QB is a counterpoint to the opposing QB (See Miller, Von. Also see Smith, Bruce or White, Reggie...).

There's a hierarchy of importance of positions. Just look at which positions are paid the most. By and large, they're not Wide Receivers. That's not to say that they're not important of valuable. Just not "two firsts and a fourth" valuable.

An elite WR can get you 1000 or (in some cases) even 1500 yards per year. Granted that's not nearly as many passing yards as your QB will have. But it's not nothing, either. You also have to look at the fact that a guy like Jerry Rice or Larry Fitzgerald will typically draw double coverage. So the receiving yards, alone, don't tell the whole story of the WR's contributions to your team.

In the specific case of Sammy Watkins Whaley spent a fortune (in draft picks) on a receiver at a time when he didn't have a quarterback. That was mistake #1. Mistake #2 was paying a premium price for a guy who thus far has not lived up to his top 5 draft status. I'm not saying he's a bad player, and I'd certainly rather have him than, say, Donte Whitner. But he isn't AJ Greene, and probably never will be.

WagonCircler

12-23-2016, 03:20 PM

An elite WR can get you 1000 or (in some cases) even 1500 yards per year. Granted that's not nearly as many passing yards as your QB will have. But it's not nothing, either. You also have to look at the fact that a guy like Jerry Rice or Larry Fitzgerald will typically draw double coverage. So the receiving yards, alone, don't tell the whole story of the WR's contributions to your team. .

While this may be true, you have to look at replacement level value, and that production can be had, especially in this instance, for a lot less than two firsts and a fourth. Odell Beckham is living proof.

If you're going to put all of your chips on the table and gamble like Whaley did, you should pay with your job when things don't pan out.

trapezeus

12-23-2016, 03:50 PM

Mace

12-23-2016, 06:02 PM

I think the point is that a great WR will really explode with a great qb. but a great qb with barely capable WRs, still gets results. so the time to pull the Watkins trade is whenyou know you have a solid QB. That's when its going to be arm of harm's scenario and having a stud will change the offense dramatically. I still think Sammy could be very good if the foot heals properly going into a contract year. I think a number of teams will pay him money and see him do well with an able qb.and that's the final nail if we let him walk if he gets past the injuries. he goes elsewhere and wins a ring showing consistency that he didn't show here due to injuries.

I'd have to point to Atlanta. They paid huge to get Julio Jones, inarguably one of the best receivers in the game, to get them over the top, and they had Matt Ryan. It was a big deal at the time, everyone was noting they just spent huge to get them over the top. Coming off a division loss in the playoffs, they lost in the wildcard round, then in the conference round, and now they're just back up to 9 wins after 3 years of trouble (4,6,8 wins). Would those picks they spent have helped more over the long term than Julio Jones did ? They were 13-3 the year before they pulled the trigger.

I suppose what I'm getting at is refining Wagon's point. You don't want to frost a cake until you're sure you have a well baked cake you can frost.

Arm of Harm

12-23-2016, 07:05 PM

I'd have to point to Atlanta. They paid huge to get Julio Jones, inarguably one of the best receivers in the game, to get them over the top, and they had Matt Ryan. It was a big deal at the time, everyone was noting they just spent huge to get them over the top. Coming off a division loss in the playoffs, they lost in the wildcard round, then in the conference round, and now they're just back up to 9 wins after 3 years of trouble (4,6,8 wins). Would those picks they spent have helped more over the long term than Julio Jones did ? They were 13-3 the year before they pulled the trigger.

I suppose what I'm getting at is refining Wagon's point. You don't want to frost a cake until you're sure you have a well baked cake you can frost.

The Falcons drafted Julio Jones in 2011. Let's look at Matt Ryan's yards per pass attempt during his career:

2008: 7.9
2009: 6.5
2010: 6.5
2011: 7.4 [Julio Jones' rookie year]
2012: 7.7
2013: 6.9 [Julio Jones was hurt, and only played five games that season.]
2014: 7.5
2015: 7.5
2016: 9.3

In three of the four non-Julio Jones seasons, Matt Ryan averaged less than 7 yards per attempt. In every Julio Jones season Ryan has averaged a minimum of 7.4 yards per attempt. These data suggest Jones has had a significant, positive effect on Matt Ryan's yards per pass attempt. The New York Times did a multi-linear regression analysis, and found that a 1 standard deviation improvement in yards per pass attempt was three times as beneficial as either a 1 standard deviation improvement in yards per rush, or a 1 standard deviation improvement in INT percentage. By improving Matt Ryan's yards per pass attempt, Julio Jones is improving Atlanta's expected winning percentage.

You point out that Atlanta's record was better (13-3) in the year leading up to the Jones pick, than it had been in the years which followed. However, the Falcons did not trade away veteran players to acquire Jones. (His draft cost was two first rounders, a second round pick, and some later draft picks.) If the team fell off from its 13-3 record, that's an indication that some of the guys who'd helped the team go 13-3 had gotten old/hit the wall, or else had left the team entirely due to free agency. That stuff would have happened anyway, with or without Jones. You could point out that the two first rounders and one second rounder used to acquire Jones could, ideally have been used to replace three of those aging or departing players. And maybe so. But that's assuming all three of the picks work out. If one of those three guys is a bust, another is a decent player, and a third is a reasonably good starter, are you really better off with that than you are with a Hall of Fame WR like Julio Jones?

Mace

12-23-2016, 07:24 PM

The Falcons drafted Julio Jones in 2011. Let's look at Matt Ryan's yards per pass attempt during his career:

2008: 7.9
2009: 6.5
2010: 6.5
2011: 7.4 [Julio Jones' rookie year]
2012: 7.7
2013: 6.9 [Julio Jones was hurt, and only played five games that season.]
2014: 7.5
2015: 7.5
2016: 9.3

In three of the four non-Julio Jones seasons, Matt Ryan averaged less than 7 yards per attempt. In every Julio Jones season Ryan has averaged a minimum of 7.4 yards per attempt. These data suggest Jones has had a significant, positive effect on Matt Ryan's yards per pass attempt. The New York Times did a multi-linear regression analysis, and found that a 1 standard deviation improvement in yards per pass attempt was three times as beneficial as either a 1 standard deviation improvement in yards per rush, or a 1 standard deviation improvement in INT percentage. By improving Matt Ryan's yards per pass attempt, Julio Jones is improving Atlanta's expected winning percentage.

You point out that Atlanta's record was better (13-3) in the year leading up to the Jones pick, than it had been in the years which followed. However, the Falcons did not trade away veteran players to acquire Jones. (His draft cost was two first rounders, a second round pick, and some later draft picks.) If the team fell off from its 13-3 record, that's an indication that some of the guys who'd helped the team go 13-3 had gotten old/hit the wall, or else had left the team entirely due to free agency. That stuff would have happened anyway, with or without Jones. You could point out that the two first rounders and one second rounder used to acquire Jones could, ideally have been used to replace three of those aging or departing players. And maybe so. But that's assuming all three of the picks work out. If one of those three guys is a bust, another is a decent player, and a third is a reasonably good starter, are you really better off with that than you are with a Hall of Fame WR like Julio Jones?

You're way overthinking it. If Jones made Ryan better, did he make the Falcons better to achieve their objective ? Not really.

If you make a QB better with a receiver, it has to be in tandem with his o-line, rb's, another receiver, and defense. You can't spend huge on frosting unless you're ready to be frosted.

Piling up stats doesn't equate to successful teams, you see this often. Simpson was a great rb, McCoy is, Watkins has occasionally dazzled....it doesn't necessarily translate the same as adding an Ezekiel Elliot or a Dez Lewis to the Cowboys. Brady is a great QB, like him or not, are Edelman, Amendola and Hogan anywhere near Julio Jones, or even Megatron with Detroit ?

My perspective is that you have to add the right guys at the right time, not expecting a player or two to save and elevate the franchise. Especially at skill positions where piling up stats just doesn't equate to team success.

The Whaley article from Graham...did not focus on skill positions, successful drafts bake a cake you can frost as needed. Look at Indy....Luck...have to protect him before you get him receivers, just getting skill guys won't help keep him on his feet to find them if the defense isn't shutting people down.

What I'm saying is, piling up stats isn't the goal, you can pile up as many as you want if you're 6-10, they have to translate to wins.

Arm of Harm

12-24-2016, 08:36 AM

You're way overthinking it. If Jones made Ryan better, did he make the Falcons better to achieve their objective ? Not really.

If you make a QB better with a receiver, it has to be in tandem with his o-line, rb's, another receiver, and defense. You can't spend huge on frosting unless you're ready to be frosted.

Piling up stats doesn't equate to successful teams, you see this often. Simpson was a great rb, McCoy is, Watkins has occasionally dazzled....it doesn't necessarily translate the same as adding an Ezekiel Elliot or a Dez Lewis to the Cowboys. Brady is a great QB, like him or not, are Edelman, Amendola and Hogan anywhere near Julio Jones, or even Megatron with Detroit ?

My perspective is that you have to add the right guys at the right time, not expecting a player or two to save and elevate the franchise. Especially at skill positions where piling up stats just doesn't equate to team success.

The Whaley article from Graham...did not focus on skill positions, successful drafts bake a cake you can frost as needed. Look at Indy....Luck...have to protect him before you get him receivers, just getting skill guys won't help keep him on his feet to find them if the defense isn't shutting people down.

What I'm saying is, piling up stats isn't the goal, you can pile up as many as you want if you're 6-10, they have to translate to wins.

If you draft a player, and if your team's record doesn't improve, then does that make that player a failure?

The Philadelphia Eagles went 6-9-1 in 1984. In 1985 they drafted Reggie White. The Eagles went 7-9 and 5-10 in White's first two years. White had 13 sacks and 18 sacks those years. Anyone pointing at the Eagles' record, without looking at White's individual contributions, would (incorrectly) conclude that the White pick had been a failure; and would have been better used elsewhere. The St. Louis Rams went 6-10 in 1996, the year before they drafted Orlando Pace. In Pace's first two seasons the Rams went 5-11 and 4-12.

The Cleveland Browns went 11-5 in 1994. In 1995 they were 4-5 when the move to Baltimore was announced. At that point they lost all their remaining games, except their last game in Cleveland. They finished 1995 with a 6-10 record. In 1996 the Baltimore Ravens drafted both Jon Ogden and Ray Lewis. The Ravens went 4-12 in 1996: a far cry from what the Cleveland Browns had achieved in '94. The Ravens went 6-9-1 in 1997, and 6-10 in 1998. Someone merely looking at that team's record, while ignoring individual contributions, would think that Ogden and Lewis had contributed little to the team's winning percentage.

Several years ago the Cardinals had achieved a special passing game due to three players: Kurt Warner, Larry Fitzgerald, and Anquan Boldin. Warner's three Super Bowl appearances, including the one with the Cardinals, represent the three highest passing yardage totals in Super Bowl history. In Arizona Warner accomplished this with a so-so defense, a so-so running game, and a so-so offensive line. Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin were far more than just "frosting." They were vital parts of that Cardinals offense: absolutely essential to the Cardinals' trip to the Super Bowl.

As others have pointed out, Whaley could have gotten better WRs than Watkins while spending less in first round picks. Also, it's useless for a guy like Watkins or Clay to get open, if the QB processes information too slowly to see his open targets. For this team players like that are frosting, because we don't have a real quarterback, and we don't have a real GM who's capable of getting us one. But most teams are not nearly this dysfunctional. Most teams could make good use of elite receiving targets. With us such targets will of course be largely wasted.