Could McGahee challenge for starters job? (1 Viewer)

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Just thinking out loud here but does the Bills draft strategy add up all that well?2003: Use 1st round pick on a player that will make no impact in 2003, possible impact in 2004, major impact (but not neccesarily on your team due to the prescence of Travis Henry) in 2005.2004: Use 1st round pick and the next year (2005)'s first round pick to draft the QB of the future (J. P. Losman).2005: Try to use the 2003 first round pick (or Travis Henry) to recoup the 2005 pick used to draft Losman.Haven't they basically deferred their 2003 pick to 2005?

Not really...with McGahee, they took a top-3 talent at the #23 pick. If he recovers, he's a huge value at that spot in the draft, even if he doesn't contribute much right away. Was Carson Palmer a waste of a #1 overall pick just because he didn't play in 2003? Was Shaun Alexander a waste for the Seahawks because he had to sit behind Ricky Watters for a year? Young players often need time to develop...what's wrong with letting McGahee rehab for a year or two before giving him a heavy workload?As for Losman, the Bills traded their 2nd round pick in 2004 and 1st in 2005 for him. Their thinking was that they'd probably be spending that 1st round pick on a QB next year anyway, yet they have no idea what kind of talent would be available for them to choose from. They liked Losman a lot, and believed having him on the team for a full year working with the new coaching staff and learning the sytem is far better than waiting until next year and hoping that someone better is available.Teams are able to fill needs in free agency these days, so high draft picks aren't as important as they used to be. If you land a star, that's great. But, many 1st round picks still go bust, and with the large signing bonuses you have to pay them, that can really mess up your cap situation.I think the Bills simply took a chance on McGahee. Right now, it looks like it might pay off, but it is still too soon to tell. Having 2 stud RBs is not a bad problem to have, especially considering the fact that their salaries are completely manageable right now.As for Losman, the Bills desperately needed a QB of the future in place b/c Bledsoe was looking like a shell of his former self last year. They whiffed on the Drew Henson situation, got rejected by Billy Volek, and none of the Big 3 QBs was available at their #13 pick. When Losman dropped, they pulled the trigger and got a guy they wanted. They have a great team in place with Wyche, Clements, etc. to tutor him and he'll be able to learn Mularkey's system from the very beginning of his career. I think that's a big advantage, and he'll have a nice set of skill players in McG, Moulds, Evans, Reed surrounding him once he takes over the starting job in 2006. The Bills have a nice mix of veterans and young players on the team already, and they are in pretty good shape for the future. Donahoe obviously felt comfortable enough with the rest of his team that he could take some chances in the draft with these early picks. We'll have to wait and see how things pan out.

 

[CanadianNFLJunkie]

In less than 45 minutes Willis gets a chance to start. From what I've seen (both exhibition games) and heard and read, Willis is NOT READY yet to be the #1 RB on the Bills. That's my opinion as well as a fact by many other observers on the team, local media and some national media types. Willis is not running fast yet. He's smooth but not hitting the hole as fast as the #3 (Ken Simonton) and #4 (Shaud Williams) RBs are. his only good run last week was the TD run where he bounced it outside and showed enough burst to turn the corner for the score. From what I've seen from a lot of other players who came back from serious knee injuries, even though they might be physically ready, their minds are still worried about that first REAL good hit on the knee. Willis appears to lack 100% of the confidence in his running ability. This could change tonight, maybe week 2 or maybe not until next year but for now Willis is supposed to be the 3rd down Back when both Henry and Willis are healthy.

 

[Northern Voice]

Not really...with McGahee, they took a top-3 talent at the #23 pick. If he recovers, he's a huge value at that spot in the draft, even if he doesn't contribute much right away? Was Carson Palmer a waste of a #1 overall pick just because he didn't play in 2003? Was Shaun Alexander a waste for the Seahawks because he had to sit behind Ricky Watters for a year? Young players often need time to develop

If Cincy started Jon Kitna this season and then traded Carson Plamer for a first in 2005 or had Seattle traded Alexander for a first in 2002(?), yes, they would have been less than smart picks IMO.IF Buffalo trades McGahee for a first in 2005, they have done nothing but draft a very talented player in 2003 and turn him into a new talented player in 2005. The new player they draft will have his own development curve to deal with (ala McGahee, Palmer, Alexander) and in that sense, they've deferred their pick.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

they very likely would not trade McGahee. If he comes back strong, Henry is the RB most likely to be moved.But, that doesn't mean that Henry isn't also likely to be the starter for most, if not all, of 2004.After this year, Henry will have taken a beating over his 4 year career...if they can trade him for a 1st round pick and already have a stud RB in place ready to roll, that's brilliant, IMO.Also, re: Losman, they basically gave up their #2 in 2004 to move their 2005 1st round pick up 1 year.Lastly, remember that the McGahee pick was basically a freebie from the Falcons for Price, a player they had no intention of signing to a long-term deal. They also got Takeo Spikes for no compensation from the Bengals that year, and he was every bit as valuable as a 1st round pick.

 

[Noahs Troopers]

Wow, never realized how many people thought Henry was the second coming.

 

[jurb26]

Wow, never realized how many people thought Henry was the second coming.

Yeah it was rather bad. Thank God that debate is over. Now we can get back to concentrating on the Den RB mess and Minn RB mess. Oh the fun!

 

[Noahs Troopers]

It's funny to me because I've been on the McGahee bandwagon since he got drafted. I didn't see any way that Henry would start over McGahee if injuries were not an issue. Talent like Willis McGahee doesn't come along that often, I'd venture to say he'll be a top 5 RB for the next 8-10 years assuming all remains healthy.

 

[radballs.]

Wow, never realized how many people thought Henry was the second coming.

It's funny to me because I've been on the McGahee bandwagon since he got drafted. I didn't see any way that Henry would start over McGahee if injuries were not an issue. Talent like Willis McGahee doesn't come along that often, I'd venture to say he'll be a top 5 RB for the next 8-10 years assuming all remains healthy.

It's a lot easier to poke holes in these prognostications when you've only been a registered member for only 6 weeks. We'll review your predictions from this off season a year from now and see how your year old posts look.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Wow, never realized how many people thought Henry was the second coming.

Yeah it was rather bad. Thank God that debate is over. Now we can get back to concentrating on the Den RB mess and Minn RB mess. Oh the fun!

were we on the same side? I can't really remember, I just know that you and I always wound up getting sucked into these debates.

 

[Family Matters]

After this year, Henry will have taken a beating over his 4 year career...if they can trade him for a 1st round pick and already have a stud RB in place ready to roll, that's brilliant, IMO.

Things change in a hurry in the NFL (Not For Long). A first round pick? That's laughable now.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

After this year, Henry will have taken a beating over his 4 year career...if they can trade him for a 1st round pick and already have a stud RB in place ready to roll, that's brilliant, IMO.

Things change in a hurry in the NFL (Not For Long). A first round pick? That's laughable now.

but it wasn't that ridiculous a year ago. If he went out and had a good year, I bet they could have gotten a high 2nd or late 1st for him.the team got off to a terrible start, he got injured, mcgahee came in and sparked the team, and Henry's value plummeted. That was one of my bigger fears going into last year, and it wound up happening.

At least the team should be set at RB for awhile now regardless of what happens with Henry.

 

[jurb26]

Wow, never realized how many people thought Henry was the second coming.

Yeah it was rather bad. Thank God that debate is over. Now we can get back to concentrating on the Den RB mess and Minn RB mess. Oh the fun!

were we on the same side? I can't really remember, I just know that you and I always wound up getting sucked into these debates.

I think you and I disagreed on the matter back then. FWIW, I have always been high on Willis and a BIG supporter. So if you were on his side, we were in agreement. Funny I can't remember which side you were on either now. Your right though..... for some reason you, me, and several others just couldn't stay out of those Willis/Travis threads.

 

[diesel7982]

It's funny to me because I've been on the McGahee bandwagon since he got drafted. I didn't see any way that Henry would start over McGahee if injuries were not an issue. Talent like Willis McGahee doesn't come along that often, I'd venture to say he'll be a top 5 RB for the next 8-10 years assuming all remains healthy.

Well, thats a bold statement. Its like saying Terrell Davis would be better than Ruben Droughns if TD had 2 good knees. No one doubted McGahee's talent, just his ability to recover from his 2nd ACL tear, the 2nd of which was just an absolutely horrifying injury.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Wow, never realized how many people thought Henry was the second coming.

Yeah it was rather bad. Thank God that debate is over. Now we can get back to concentrating on the Den RB mess and Minn RB mess. Oh the fun!

were we on the same side? I can't really remember, I just know that you and I always wound up getting sucked into these debates.

I think you and I disagreed on the matter back then. FWIW, I have always been high on Willis and a BIG supporter. So if you were on his side, we were in agreement. Funny I can't remember which side you were on either now. Your right though..... for some reason you, me, and several others just couldn't stay out of those Willis/Travis threads.

Unlike practically everyone else, I never viewed this as a Travis vs. Willis debate. Both have their pros and cons. I felt Travis was good enough to hold off a less than fully recovered McGahee, but I also knew a recovered McGahee would be superior to Henry. The offensive line never built any chemistry during the preseason last year due to a variety of injuries, and got off to a horrible start as a result. Henry had nowhere to run early in the season...McGahee came in and was better able to make something out of nothing due primarily to his size and patience. Henry got injured, the line started playing better, and that was the end of Travis' days as a starter. If he had stayed healthy and got better blocking early on, he likely would have held onto the starting job much longer.Either way, as a Bills fan, I'm excited for the future. McGahee looked more and more impressive as the season wore on, and is a lot of fun to watch.

 

[Homer @ RJ]

I don't think the Bills drafted McGahee to sit on the bench.

McGahee was graded out as one of the most talented backs in college - right up there with LTII.

20 Months removed from injury.

Let's be honest...is Henry really as talented as McGahee?  I reside in the "No" camp, firmly.

And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

 

[General Malaise]

I don't think the Bills drafted McGahee to sit on the bench.

McGahee was graded out as one of the most talented backs in college - right up there with LTII.

20 Months removed from injury.

Let's be honest...is Henry really as talented as McGahee?  I reside in the "No" camp, firmly.

And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I don't think the Bills drafted McGahee to sit on the bench.

McGahee was graded out as one of the most talented backs in college - right up there with LTII.

20 Months removed from injury.

Let's be honest...is Henry really as talented as McGahee?  I reside in the "No" camp, firmly.

And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

Henry's injury played a significant role in his being displaced from the starting job.

Oct 17, 2004

Willis McGahee (RB) BUF made his first NFL start on Sunday and rushed for 111 yards on 26 carries, with another 31 yards on three receptions. Travis Henry was active for the game but did not play because of his sprained left foot. McGahee wasn't spectacular, but his performance was certainly good enough to create a legitimate running back controversy in Buffalo for the first time.

Oct 19, 2004

Bills coach Mike Mularkey said that Willis McGahee (RB) BUF earned more playing time with his strong showing in Week 6, according to the Democrat and Chronicle. However, Mularkey also said that Travis Henry will start this week if is sprained arch heals sufficiently.

Oct 22, 2004

Travis Henry is expected to start for the Bills on Sunday, but Willis McGahee (RB) BUF should see more action than he did prior to last week, when he started in place of an injured Henry.

Oct 24, 2004

Willis McGahee (RB) BUF got most of the rushing work for the Bills on Sunday after Travis Henry was ineffective early on. McGahee rushed for 58 yards on 16 carries and was hardly impressive himself.

Oct 27, 2004

The Bills announced that Willis McGahee (RB) BUF will start ahead of Travis Henry at running back on Sunday, according to the AP. "He's made some more yards after first contact," Bills coach Mike Mularkey said.

 

[Marc Levin]

Aaron's 100 percent correct - Henry wasn't healthy when he was replaced.

 

[MelvinTScupper]

Aaron's 100 percent correct - Henry wasn't healthy when he was replaced.

dragging up old threads?change the title so people don't think you're all high.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

dragging up old threads?

might want to talk to "Homer@RJ" about that.

 

[gman8343]

The Bills honestly feel that McGahee still isn't 100 percent recovered from his catastrophic knee surgery, and won't be until sometime around October.

October is in the middle of the season. If he's 100% and as explosive as he was in college in October -- why wouldn't he eat into Henry's carries this year?

 

[Capella]

boy you mods sure circle the wagons pretty quick around here. did a siren go off somewhere? GMs point was this:

And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

Henry came back fine last year from his injury and seemed healthy enough to play. Problem was, a better back was in his way. Buffalo realized this in the offseason and shipped his ### out of town to whoever would give up a mid-round pick. Just because Henry's injury forced Buffalo's hand means little. Henry came back and was able to play but didn't get on the field. GM was dead right on who the better back was.It happened, mods.

 

[General Malaise]

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

boy you mods sure circle the wagons pretty quick around here. did a siren go off somewhere? GMs point was this:

And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

Henry came back fine last year from his injury and seemed healthy enough to play. Problem was, a better back was in his way. Buffalo realized this in the offseason and shipped his ### out of town to whoever would give up a mid-round pick. Just because Henry's injury forced Buffalo's hand means little. Henry came back and was able to play but didn't get on the field. GM was dead right on who the better back was.It happened, mods.

Has nothing to do with us being mods. If anyone else had said what Woodrow said, I'd be backing them up right now too. Woodrow (and myself) said that Henry would be tough to beat out as long as he stayed healthy. His injury opened the door for McGahee to take over. If Henry never gets injured last year, he would have very likely remained the starter for most of the season.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

boy you mods sure circle the wagons pretty quick around here. did a siren go off somewhere?

GMs point was this:

And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

Henry came back fine last year from his injury and seemed healthy enough to play. Problem was, a better back was in his way. Buffalo realized this in the offseason and shipped his ### out of town to whoever would give up a mid-round pick. Just because Henry's injury forced Buffalo's hand means little. Henry came back and was able to play but didn't get on the field. GM was dead right on who the better back was.

It happened, mods.

Has nothing to do with us being mods. If anyone else had said what Woodrow said, I'd be backing them up right now too. Woodrow (and myself) said that Henry would be tough to beat out as long as he stayed healthy. His injury opened the door for McGahee to take over. If Henry never gets injured last year, he would have very likely remained the starter for most of the season.

Yeah, probably but when Henry was healthy enough to play again, he would have gotten his job back if indeed he was a better back. What happened is a better back was on the football team so Henry went else where. IMO, if McGahee would have eventually saw the playing field because of his talent, Henry getting dinged just made it happen sooner than later.Sure hope people don't dig up all the things I have said that didn't come true though.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Yeah, probably but when Henry was healthy enough to play again, he would have gotten his job back if indeed he was a better back. What happened is a better back was on the football team so Henry went else where. IMO, if McGahee would have eventually saw the playing field because of his talent, Henry getting dinged just made it happen sooner than later.

Sure hope people don't dig up all the things I have said that didn't come true though.

McGahee played better than Henry did, so he earned the starting job. But, my point is that he wouldn't have even gotten that chance until much later if the Henry injury didn't happen.Anyway, this is silly. I still don't really see any problem with what Woodrow said:

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

and I definitely don't see how he was by anyone.

 

[LHUCKS]

I don't think the Bills drafted McGahee to sit on the bench.

McGahee was graded out as one of the most talented backs in college - right up there with LTII.

20 Months removed from injury.

Let's be honest...is Henry really as talented as McGahee?  I reside in the "No" camp, firmly.

And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

Is avatar theft legal?

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I don't think the Bills drafted McGahee to sit on the bench.

McGahee was graded out as one of the most talented backs in college - right up there with LTII.

20 Months removed from injury.

Let's be honest...is Henry really as talented as McGahee?  I reside in the "No" camp, firmly.

And I contend that McGahee will be the feature back on this team in 2004.

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

Is avatar theft legal?

I swear I thought it was an alias of some sort. Hucks, tell me you have a patent on that avatar and we'll take care of this guy.

 

[Noahs Troopers]

McGahee just can't get respect it seems. All the doubters then, he puts up 1100/13 in 12 games and still the doubters. Last year it was: 1. Hell never play again 2. Henry is jesus in disguise and this year it's 1. JP losman is a young man 2. Gonna see 8 in the box. Two little points I'd like to point out:1. JP Losman can't be much worse than Bledsoe last season2. McGahee faced many 8 in the box last yearKeep up the hate, haters.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Yeah, probably but when Henry was healthy enough to play again, he would have gotten his job back if indeed he was a better back.  What happened is a better back was on the football team so Henry went else where.  IMO, if McGahee would have eventually saw the playing field because of his talent, Henry getting dinged just made it happen sooner than later.

Sure hope people don't dig up all the things I have said that didn't come true though. 

McGahee played better than Henry did, so he earned the starting job. But, my point is that he wouldn't have even gotten that chance until much later if the Henry injury didn't happen.Anyway, this is silly. I still don't really see any problem with what Woodrow said:

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

and I definitely don't see how he was by anyone.

Exactly, what the poster did was he isolated part of Jason's post. The sentence right above your highlighted area. He didn't refer to his entire message.That's sort of funny though, even if he was just flat out wrong, which happens to all of us. He said he was .

You guys do have some bulleseyes on your back at times. Next thing you know posters will be stealing/copying your avatars.......nah nobody would do that.

 

[Capella]

Yeah, probably but when Henry was healthy enough to play again, he would have gotten his job back if indeed he was a better back.  What happened is a better back was on the football team so Henry went else where.  IMO, if McGahee would have eventually saw the playing field because of his talent, Henry getting dinged just made it happen sooner than later.

Sure hope people don't dig up all the things I have said that didn't come true though. 

McGahee played better than Henry did, so he earned the starting job. But, my point is that he wouldn't have even gotten that chance until much later if the Henry injury didn't happen.Anyway, this is silly. I still don't really see any problem with what Woodrow said:

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

and I definitely don't see how he was by anyone.

Exactly, what the poster did was he isolated part of Jason's post. The sentence right above your highlighted area. He didn't refer to his entire message.That's sort of funny though, even if he was just flat out wrong, which happens to all of us. He said he was .

You guys do have some bulleseyes on your back at times. Next thing you know posters will be stealing/copying your avatars.......nah nobody would do that.

More likely, it was just my alias Woodrow a little.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Yeah, probably but when Henry was healthy enough to play again, he would have gotten his job back if indeed he was a better back.  What happened is a better back was on the football team so Henry went else where.  IMO, if McGahee would have eventually saw the playing field because of his talent, Henry getting dinged just made it happen sooner than later.

Sure hope people don't dig up all the things I have said that didn't come true though. 

McGahee played better than Henry did, so he earned the starting job. But, my point is that he wouldn't have even gotten that chance until much later if the Henry injury didn't happen.Anyway, this is silly. I still don't really see any problem with what Woodrow said:

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

and I definitely don't see how he was by anyone.

Exactly, what the poster did was he isolated part of Jason's post. The sentence right above your highlighted area. He didn't refer to his entire message.That's sort of funny though, even if he was just flat out wrong, which happens to all of us. He said he was .

You guys do have some bulleseyes on your back at times. Next thing you know posters will be stealing/copying your avatars.......nah nobody would do that.

More likely, it was just my alias Woodrow a little.

He can take it. Is that your alias with the Lhucks avatar as well?? We have to find out who that is. I was cracking up when I saw that and then saw some other name by it. I bet Lhucks nearly had a heart attack when he first saw it.

 

[Capella]

Yeah, probably but when Henry was healthy enough to play again, he would have gotten his job back if indeed he was a better back.  What happened is a better back was on the football team so Henry went else where.  IMO, if McGahee would have eventually saw the playing field because of his talent, Henry getting dinged just made it happen sooner than later.

Sure hope people don't dig up all the things I have said that didn't come true though. 

McGahee played better than Henry did, so he earned the starting job. But, my point is that he wouldn't have even gotten that chance until much later if the Henry injury didn't happen.Anyway, this is silly. I still don't really see any problem with what Woodrow said:

Show me one instance where a healthy back with Henry's on field pedigree was displaced while still on the roster? Maybe this is an exception to the rule, but history isn't in McGahee's favor.

and I definitely don't see how he was by anyone.

Exactly, what the poster did was he isolated part of Jason's post. The sentence right above your highlighted area. He didn't refer to his entire message.That's sort of funny though, even if he was just flat out wrong, which happens to all of us. He said he was .

You guys do have some bulleseyes on your back at times. Next thing you know posters will be stealing/copying your avatars.......nah nobody would do that.

More likely, it was just my alias Woodrow a little.

He can take it. Is that your alias with the Lhucks avatar as well?? We have to find out who that is. I was cracking up when I saw that and then saw some other name by it. I bet Lhucks nearly had a heart attack when he first saw it.

 

[Noahs Troopers]

Much ado about nadda.

I would be shocked if the Bills went with McGahee this year who has had zero regular season experience over Henry who is an annual pro-bowl candidate.

That being said, one will be playing elsewhere in 2005 and I wouldn't surprise me if it was Henry.