Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

[Mr. Pink]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

You have to have a certain level of intelligence in order to be able to participate in a discussion as such.

Your points and take are so in a vacuum that it's ridiculous. Purely ridiculous.

ie... you have nothing further to add so instead of staying on topic you resort to basically name calling.

Got it

[The Jokeman]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

He got paid much more than the three players that finished ahead of him in sacks last season.

He got paid much more than the 16 players that finished ahead of him in sacks in 2012.

He logged 13 sacks last season, the team had 57 for a franchise record sacks. The result, a 20th ranked scoring Defense and a 6-10 record, again.

So what's not sinking in for you in this discussion?

I mean if you want to continue to evaluate Mario's contributions in a vacuum, keep on going, you're doing a fine job.

This really isn't very complicated. Get Mario for $100M, or get a bunch of other players that can help us win more games for the same amount of money.

and if Mario isn't on this team do you think underpaid Jerry Hughes racks up double digit sacks? Or what about Kyle and Dareus making the Pro Bowl? I don't but who knows that offseason we landed Mario I though a more realistic expectation was to sign Wallace Gilberry who's put up 14.0 sacks in two seasons for the Bengals compared to the 23.5 Mario has here.

[jlgarsh]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

BS

Talk about trolling.

Kyle's been one of the best DTs in the game and that didn't just happen in 2012.

The rest of the stuff that you absurdly attribute to Mario had primarily to do with the system last season.

Also, presumably you've missed the discussions earlier in the offseason and preseason where I posted links to analyses that clearly painted the picture that Mario was the worst of our linemen, all of them, not just the starters, at setting the edge as they like to say.

Sounds like you need to do a little homework first before coming into a discussion like this.

That's the problem with forums like this, anything sounds intelligent, but most of it isn't. "Making the guys around him better" is an overused and gratuitously used cliche that's become meaningless. So is the part about sustaining double teams, which is also false by the way, thereby allowing other defenders to make plays.

It sounds great, just like on TV, but unfortunately you're wrong.

Mario's not worth $100M or anything close. Anyone insisting that he is doesn't understand football.

Kyle Williams was a pro bowler before Mario came, but you're telling me it was solely scheme that made Hughes and Dareus better? Why is Hughes still paying well on the other end, when we changed coordinators? You disagree with me, therefore I'm trolling? I've been called many things in life, but never a troll. I don't get to post here as often as I'd like, but my low post count doesn't mean that I only chime in occasionally to spout nonsense. Mario directly led to us beating the Dolphins last year with the strip-sack of Tannehill, and his 4.5 sacks against Carolina helped keep us in the game before EJ drove the offense down the field. Mario's contract has not prevented us from bringing in other good players, so what's the difference? Is there a defensive player in football worth $100 million? Probably not. However, with the cap going up, salaries will keep rising, and in time it won't be such an outlier. By the way; How did this thread even get started back up? There are way more pressing issues with this team than the size of Mario Williams contract. Here are some:

1.) Future owners
2.) Potential stadium locations, costs, and financing
3.) current QB situation (Manuel, Tuel, Palmer, etc)
4.) Jim Kelly
5.) the differences between this coaching staff, and other recent staffs
6.) Training camp and preseason observations
7.) what do the Bills do with CJ Spiller?
8.) predictions for the season

let's talk constructively, and share opinions without name calling...this is a message board, not grade school.

[swiper]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

With the Bills cap space room last year and this year, both of those players could have been easily signed despite Mario's contract.

The Bills incorrectly undervalued those two players.

That we we were operating with an internal salary cap under Ralph.

I hope things will be different under Pegula.

Wilson always operated with that. That's why the team never performed to their full potential. That and Marv Levy not being able to get his players to bed without prostitutes the night before the Super Bowl.

[Fletch]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

Kyle Williams was a pro bowler before Mario came, but you're telling me it was solely scheme that made Hughes and Dareus better? Why is Hughes still paying well on the other end, when we changed coordinators? You disagree with me, therefore I'm trolling? I've been called many things in life, but never a troll. I don't get to post here as often as I'd like, but my low post count doesn't mean that I only chime in occasionally to spout nonsense. Mario directly led to us beating the Dolphins last year with the strip-sack of Tannehill, and his 4.5 sacks against Carolina helped keep us in the game before EJ drove the offense down the field. Mario's contract has not prevented us from bringing in other good players, so what's the difference? Is there a defensive player in football worth $100 million? Probably not. However, with the cap going up, salaries will keep rising, and in time it won't be such an outlier. By the way; How did this thread even get started back up? There are way more pressing issues with this team than the size of Mario Williams contract. Here are some:

1.) Future owners
2.) Potential stadium locations, costs, and financing
3.) current QB situation (Manuel, Tuel, Palmer, etc)
4.) Jim Kelly
5.) the differences between this coaching staff, and other recent staffs
6.) Training camp and preseason observations
7.) what do the Bills do with CJ Spiller?
8.) predictions for the season

let's talk constructively, and share opinions without name calling...this is a message board, not grade school.

Easy Jackson!



I never call anyone a troll seriously, it's always jokingly or facetiously. The term gets thrown around here regularly and has lost any and all meaning. It's usually used by posters that do post regularly and don't like the content of another's posts. I know you're not a troll, hardly anyone here is, yet if you believed the labels and cheap name calling, as you say, grade-schoolish behavior, there are many.

Having said that, great post, and more astute than most here. Agree that Kyle was a pro-bowler before Mario got here, therefore my attack on the statement that Marios presence' made him better.

I agree with some of your points but not with others. To address the latter ones:

Why is Hughes still paying well on the other end, when we changed coordinators?

Actually we don't know yet, let's wait to see how the season plays out. Last season was a pass-rush happy defense, yet we allowed 3 more passing TDs than we had the season prior despite setting a franchise record for sacks and what, 3rd ever best in INTs? We ranked 20th in scoring. How do we reconcile those things other than to state that the sacks were overblown. As I've pointed out to many posters, we had 10 combined sacks against Atlanta and NO and yet still allowed 30 some points and great passing days against both teams. Again, we have to reconcile that before declaring Pettine's defense as being good.

Mario's contract has not prevented us from bringing in other good players, so what's the difference?

The reasons you gave are really not reasons. Anytime you drop $100M on a player it prevents you from spending that money elsewhere.

This issue is more than simply an exercise in whether or not Mario was worth that much, he wasn't, but it's more an exercise in how does one build a winning football team. For an answer to that, from a contract perspective, look at the Pats or Seahawks more specifically, and how much their players get paid.

Mario was signed here to put fannies in the seats coming off another miserable 6-10 campaign. Everyone in the organization foolishly thought, for some unbeknownst reason, that sacks translated to wins despite the glaring lack of evidence of that elsewhere in the league. So they went out and broke the bank on Mario.

But saying that dropping $100M on Mario did not hinder us from signing any other players is the same as saying that dropping $66M on Fitzpatrick didn't prevent us from signing any other players, which is ridiculous.

I look forward to interacting with you in the future.

[jlgarsh]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

Easy Jackson!



I never call anyone a troll seriously, it's always jokingly or facetiously. The term gets thrown around here regularly and has lost any and all meaning. It's usually used by posters that do post regularly and don't like the content of another's posts. I know you're not a troll, hardly anyone here is, yet if you believed the labels and cheap name calling, as you say, grade-schoolish behavior, there are many.

Having said that, great post, and more astute than most here. Agree that Kyle was a pro-bowler before Mario got here, therefore my attack on the statement that Marios presence' made him better.

I agree with some of your points but not with others. To address the latter ones:



Actually we don't know yet, let's wait to see how the season plays out. Last season was a pass-rush happy defense, yet we allowed 3 more passing TDs than we had the season prior despite setting a franchise record for sacks and what, 3rd ever best in INTs? We ranked 20th in scoring. How do we reconcile those things other than to state that the sacks were overblown. As I've pointed out to many posters, we had 10 combined sacks against Atlanta and NO and yet still allowed 30 some points and great passing days against both teams. Again, we have to reconcile that before declaring Pettine's defense as being good.



The reasons you gave are really not reasons. Anytime you drop $100M on a player it prevents you from spending that money elsewhere.

This issue is more than simply an exercise in whether or not Mario was worth that much, he wasn't, but it's more an exercise in how does one build a winning football team. For an answer to that, from a contract perspective, look at the Pats or Seahawks more specifically, and how much their players get paid.

Mario was signed here to put fannies in the seats coming off another miserable 6-10 campaign. Everyone in the organization foolishly thought, for some unbeknownst reason, that sacks translated to wins despite the glaring lack of evidence of that elsewhere in the league. So they went out and broke the bank on Mario.

But saying that dropping $100M on Mario did not hinder us from signing any other players is the same as saying that dropping $66M on Fitzpatrick didn't prevent us from signing any other players, which is ridiculous.

I look forward to interacting with you in the future.

I look forward to interacting with you as well. This looks to be the most talented Bills team in a long time at the skill positions....it all comes down to QB.

[WagonCircler]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

Look at MEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

Look at MEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!

[coastal]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

Look at MEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

Look at MEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!

Ok... we are. This is what I see...

image.jpg

[WagonCircler]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

"Look at meeeee!!!!!! I recycle 2 year old threads because nobody's paying attention to meeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

[Fletch]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

I look forward to interacting with you as well. This looks to be the most talented Bills team in a long time at the skill positions....it all comes down to QB.

The potential is there for the WRs but they still have much to prove.

I can't disagree more, again, on the DBs though. I don't think they're very talented. McKelvin sucks as a CB and always has, last season he was more a beneficiary of the system than anything else. Gilmore hasn't stepped up to become the CB we thought we were getting with the 10th overall pick in 2012. The rest of the DBs range from average to less.

The LBs are going to be weak, very weak, against the pass this season.

As to the RBs, Brown and Dixon haven't proven a thing yet in the NFL and neither has had any success on 3rd downs. Spiller too has had no success on 3rd downs, all three are role-players of varying sorts, not one is a 3-down RB. Which leaves us with only Jackson as a true 3-down RB, and he's the oldest RB in the league. This is season where age starts to become a big factor for him. He's my favorite Bills RB, right up there with Thurman, but he's finished.

TE is weak for us.

I just graded the units in another thread, here are those grades:

DL - A-
OL - B
RBs - B- (Only because Jackson's 33 and the oldest RB in the league, C- w/o Jackson)
WRs - C+ (Until Watkins, Woods, and Williams step up quite a bit)
LBs - C-
DBs - C-
TEs - C-
QB - D

[Novacane]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

Is Williams even playing today cause he's invisible

[coastal]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

DJ Fluker is handling him.

[TacklingDummy]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

DJ Fluker is handling him.

Who?

Mario made his 1 play for the game when he slammed the Chargers RB to the ground.

[gr8slayer]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

Haha, the thread that just won't die.

[BertSquirtgum]

Re: Mario Williams is "Fools Gold"

DJ Fluker is handling him.

You're getting handled by Blondie