Buffalo Rumblings: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Getting Marshawn Lynch touches is key for Bills' success Bar-right-arrows



spread the word

Bills prepared to move on without Crowell


Crowell likely finished as a member of the Bills (Photo Source)

Yesterday, the Buffalo Bills shocked their fan base when they announced that linebacker Angelo Crowell had been placed on Injured Reserve.  Though he had practiced just a day earlier and had participated in the Bills' pre-season victory over Indianapolis, Crowell chose to have surgery when his lingering knee injury was deemed too difficult to play on.

Now, the fact that Crowell is seeking a second opinion on his injured knee is, by and large, irrelevant.  Crowell's 2008 season is over, and as this is the final year of a contract extension he signed in 2005, he will become an unrestricted free agent - and his career with Buffalo is likely over.

Variety of Reasons Behind the Move
A source close to the team informs us that Buffalo's decision to end Crowell's season was not made lightly.  The team was concerned about the amount of time it would take Crowell to rehab; the standard line of 2-4 weeks post-arthroscopic surgery may not have applied to Crowell, as his injury was lingering, and the team feared that it may be without Crowell for up to three months.  Crowell's decision to seek a second opinion is likely to dispel the rumor that he's damaged goods now that his season is over.  It's important to note that Buffalo's medical staff was behind this decision, and that their concern about what could happen during Crowell's rehab was the motivating factor behind the decision.  Had they waited for Crowell's rehab to begin and then knew that his out time would be substantial, they'd have been taking a huge risk.

The team also feared that Crowell had ulterior motives in sitting out - namely, his contract.  The team feels that Crowell made his decision with the idea that he'd miss part of the season, get completely healthy, and have a productive go of it once he returned in order to maximize his contract value.  That's not entirely unreasonable to believe given the circumstances.  The team's decision to IR Crowell was not made, however, to prevent him from maximizing his contract value.

Not a Part of Long-Term Plans
In short, the Bills' current regime - led by head coach Dick Jauron - has never been overly enamored with Crowell since taking over the team in 2006.  Crowell has been a productive player in his time, to be sure, and he was certainly good enough to be a starter here, but the coaches have never felt he gave it his all, both on and off the field.  That's not to say they view him as a "me-first" player; he just doesn't display some of the traits that the team's leaders do, particularly in work ethic.  He's also not viewed as the most intelligent of players, especially in coverage.  It boils down to this: the Bills viewed Crowell as good enough to start in 2008, but he wasn't in the team's long-term plans.

The fact that Crowell's decision was spur-of-the-moment brought the situation to a head.  Our source tells us that once Crowell's decision was made, the Bills were faced with an ultimatum: wait for Crowell and possibly play a double-digit number of football games with only 52 players, or put him on IR, let him get healthy, and wish him well.  In the end, the decision wasn't exactly easy, but it was probably the right one - if Crowell is a lame duck and the team wasn't happy with him, what gain is there to waiting for him to return, especially if his motives are more contractual-based than team-based?  The Bills' duty is to the team, not the player, and if Keith Ellison is more dedicated to the team than Crowell is - and isn't considered a huge drop-off - then you do what's best for the team.  It's that simple.

Bills Leaders Upset with Crowell?
Don't forget, either, that some of the popular players mentioned as possible releases in lieu of losing Crowell - such as DE Copeland Bryan or OT Matt Murphy - earned their keep.  They're team-first guys; Murphy in particular has proven to be the antithesis to Crowell, struggling to play through a shoulder injury for the good of the team.  There's a difference between "hurt" and "injured", folks.  Crowell is hurt; he can clearly play on the injury, as he did so literally a day before deciding to have surgery.  Meanwhile, Murphy is gutting it out, and guys like Ryan Denney, Chris Kelsay and even Ellison played through actual injuries last season - our source says "they were virtual cripples" - all for the sake of the team.  Our source reveals that several key players - leaders - aren't happy with Crowell's decision at all.

Ultimately, what's important to know about Crowell is this: he was, in essence, a lame duck player that wasn't necessarily a part of the team's long-term plans.  We fans can have our opinions on the matter, but ultimately, the team is excited about what Keith Ellison can do as a starter on the strong side.  Any notions that the team made this move to cut costs or punish Crowell for pulling a surprise on them are completely and utterly false - they did it because of the nature of Crowell's injury and the fact that they didn't want to wait for a guy who might not be putting the team first.  It's not the prettiest of situations, but as they've done many other times, the Bills made the right decision in this matter.  It was a hard decision, but it was right.

1 recs | Comment 53 comments | Digg!

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Damn. I was fairly close in my email to you Brian.

Some right, some wrong. General gist was close.

Crowell’s knee is worse than has been let on. Maybe Merriman levels. He wanted to play, being his contract year and all. But because the Bills haven’t been as high on him as the fans he decided to have some surgery so he didn’t do more damage to the knee thinking that he could come back, play well and get paid next year (but not by the Bills.) He decided that because they’re not committed to him he’s not going to be committed to them. The front office was originally leaning towards shutting him down for the year but decided that Crowell for 12 weeks is better than no Crowell. More results came in, showing that extent of the damage. That combined with his attitude made the FO say, you’re done. You’re not going to be effective this year, we need someone who is willing to give it all for this team. Now Crowell is looking for a second opinion because he a) wants to be released at some point and be free to sign with another team this year so he can make bank next year. b) he’s worried about being labeled as damage goods and is scared that he just lost his $$$$.

by twoeightnine on Sep 5, 2008 4:50 PM EDT   0 recs

what what and what?

so now the team is excited about what Keith Ellison can do?? Brian where are you getting this from? Ellison had earned himself a spot on the bench based on his play as a starter. I thought that was why we brought in Mitchell so Ellison wouldnt have to play!!

McKelvin and Hardy - rookies of the year

by poz on Sep 5, 2008 4:51 PM EDT   0 recs

I mentioned this in the article. You’re errant on two counts: Ellison wasn’t benched, his position was upgraded; and the Bills are excited about what Ellison can do on the strong side. They like the kid.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 4:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Brian, you have been watching to much convention coverage

call it what you want, but Ellison was not the starter as of two days ago. As I posted on another thread,
the 17 lbs of muscle we lose going from Crowell to Ellison will be missed on our left side. I am guessing we will see the Hawks running to the right a lot. And when they do run left, Jones will be looking to cut back on the over pursuing, undersized Ellison. Do you really expect the Bills to say, “dam we have to start Ellison! We are screwed!!!!”

That said, I agree with the rest of your well written article. If Crowell is going to be out for half the season or more, the Bills did what was best for the team.

by Joe P. on Sep 5, 2008 5:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

To lay it all out on the line, I haven’t watched a lick of convention coverage. :)

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 6:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Hopefully you caught the Palin speech

A friend got back from a National Guard 2 week stint in Alaska. She saw lots of, “Alaska is the coldest state and has the hottest governor” bumper stickers.

On a football related note, I get queasy seeing the words ‘Ellison’ and ‘strong’ in the same sentence. Maybe it was part of the grand plan all along but Buffalo will certainly be looking for an OLB in the offseason….hopefully not at the expense of the C and TE positions.

by Ron From NM on Sep 5, 2008 7:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Please don’t confuse “strong side” with “Ellison needs to be stronger than the weak side linebacker”. He’ll just be taking on, rather than shedding, blockers – something he should be decidedly better at.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 8:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah!!!

I fell in luv again!!! Lost count how many times though… LOL!!!

by Cinga on Sep 5, 2008 8:37 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Crowell

Anyone who thinks this move was financial is wrong. The defense was looking very solid going on to the season. With Ellison at the strong side, I think our defense takes a very large step back. He has not showed much of anything since joining the team, and I do not think he will fair well. I hope I am wrong, however I do not think I will be. Crowell is a quality player, and will be missed.

One question I have is why not move DiGorgio to strong side? Last season he proved he was a playmaker. Whenever he was on the field he made plays. He may be a bit undersized, however he is a playmaker. Does anyone else feel the same way?

by rcrumpley44 on Sep 5, 2008 4:53 PM EDT   0 recs

yes, I do

McKelvin and Hardy - rookies of the year

by poz on Sep 5, 2008 5:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah, I agree with you. DiGiorgio was solid last year. I think he’d be a better addition than Ellison. Ellison’s preseason performance has not excited me. I think it’s safe to say LB will be a key position in the draft for Buffalo next year.

by Zorak84 on Sep 5, 2008 5:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

My issue with DiGiorgio is that he’s not great in coverage. I like the idea of starting Ellison right now, but if he struggles, I’d certainly be up for experimenting with DiGiorgio on the strong side.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 6:51 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

DiGi was no better than Ellison last year

both can’t shed blocks to save their lives. Both get outmuscled and both aren’t as quick as some people believe.

I just hope Ellison plays better on the strong side than he did the weak side. Of course, it’s hard to be any worse.

~K

by Kurupt on Sep 5, 2008 8:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Thanks Brian and twoeightnine

For clearing up the conspiracy theory I posted yesterday. Maybe Kurupt and Kaisertown can understand where I was coming from.

He decided that because they’re not committed to him he’s not going to be committed to them.

The team also feared that Crowell had ulterior motives in sitting out – namely, his contract. The team feels that Crowell made his decision with the idea that he’d miss part of the season, get completely healthy, and have a productive go of it once he returned in order to maximize his contract value.

by the Skycap on Sep 5, 2008 6:06 PM EDT   0 recs

Don't thank me.

This was all Brian’s doing. I just pulled that out of my ass when emailing Brian. I was just going on what facts were out there as opposed to everyone’s speculation. Sometimes I’m not completely full of BS.

by twoeightnine on Sep 5, 2008 6:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He decided that because they’re not committed to him he’s not going to be committed to them.

That’s incorrect. He decided to have surgery to maximize his contract value and get completely healthy, and the Bills’ doctors worried that he’d struggle to recover in what is the “usual” 2-4 week time frame. That’s largely the reason for the decision.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 6:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

My reply was to the Skycap… :)

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 6:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If that is where you are coming from than I kind of get you, but that isn’t what you were talking about earlier on. You claimed that Crowell “staged” the surgery and intentionally waited until the season was about to start. You believed that he wanted to miss the first few games so that the team would realize how much of an upgrade he is over Ellison or whoever they tried to start in his place. And all of that is as ludicrous as it was yesterday and this morning.

If you want to come up with a thoery where Crowell didn’t want to play hurt because he thought he wouldn’t play as well and it would lead to less dollars, or a theory where Crowell realized he would eventually need the surgery and didn’t want to wait until the offseason because he thought teams not being able to watch him play post surgery would lead to less dollars, or a theory similiar to that, then I can totally buy in. This wasn’t a scheme Crowell devised a month ago, it was something that came up recently.

by kaisertown on Sep 5, 2008 7:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Exactly

that’s what I feel too. Paragraph two is where my thought lied on the subject. The claims made yesterday by SC and maybe others you listed in paragraph 1 is exactly what I thought to be crazy…

~K

by Kurupt on Sep 5, 2008 9:02 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I thought that Crowell wanted to get all healed up and have a strong return to the field all along. No conspiracy there. I knew he didn’t want to play hurt and his best shot and playing at a high level was having the procedure and coming back healthy for 10-12 games. No arguments there.

What I didn’t believe and still don’t, is that Crowell wanted out of the lineup so he could prove to the Bills how much better he is than Ellison. That’s not how you show you deserve a new deal. Being healthy and producing is one way, obviously didn’t work for him here, but trying to compare your absence to the play of someone currently in the lineup isn’t wise…

~K

by Kurupt on Sep 5, 2008 9:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Front Office

I have supported the front office regarding the Peters 100% and was proud of how they have handled the situation.

However, in this case I side with Crowell. The man is looking at his future and knows that is not in Buffalo. I dont care whether the Bills did not want to sign him to a long term deal, but I understand to some degree Crowell’s thoughts and felt it was a retalitory action by the front office. I expect players and fans to make emotional driven decision but NOT our Front office. They need to take the high road.

Here is what I know: Crowell would most likely be out the first 5 weeks and the bye week and return in 7 weeks. His injury is a 2-4 week injury that may have taken a little more time. Even Jauron acknowledged it would probably be half the season at worst. I guess I believe Crowell is worth keeping for half the season as I view him as a play maker and a substantially upgrade. I think Crowell is that much better than Ellison and that our D could have been elite (top 3-5) with him.

Basically, I think the risk to see how he responsds to surgery and treatment would have been a risk worth taking even though Crowell did somewhat screw the team by alledgedgly having surgery on THursday. If the doctors say he couldn’t return well then my argument is irrelevant but I dont really believe that without an explicit stmt from them

by Berg79 on Sep 5, 2008 6:10 PM EDT   0 recs

Great piece Brian

I think Brian is spot on in his reporting and his analysis. If the medical staff thought that this had the potential of turning into a three month recovery (12-14 weeks), they really had no choice at all but to IR him. As to the on-off field difference between Crowell and Ellison—I defer to the coaches, who actually may know a little more than us. We’ll know starting Sunday.

Geronimo

by Geronimo on Sep 5, 2008 6:40 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The man is looking at his future and knows that is not in Buffalo. I dont care whether the Bills did not want to sign him to a long term deal, but I understand to some degree Crowell’s thoughts and felt it was a retalitory action by the front office.

That’s exactly what it was NOT. That’s the crux of the whole article. The injury was responsible for the decision, which was made easier by Crowell’s standing with the team.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 6:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Can a team reverse a player move?

Based on the fact that Crowell did not have surgery and this situation has not been more than 24, can the Bills rescind placing Crowell on IR?

by gjv on Sep 5, 2008 6:37 PM EDT   0 recs

No. His season is over.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 6:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

His season is over? Maybe his season as a Bill, but cant he get an injury settlement and still play on another team?

by Thronsen on Sep 5, 2008 7:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

What are the odds?

Do you think the Bills will announce a contract extension with Evans before Sundays game? I’ll go on record first and say YES.

by the Skycap on Sep 5, 2008 7:16 PM EDT   0 recs

I’d guesstimate the bye week.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 7:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Unless we start slow...

I think your right.. It would be a good “rally the troops” thing for the bye, but would help also (and Evans would prolly get more), if we start slow…

by Cinga on Sep 5, 2008 8:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd say NO

 a resounding NO

Both sides don’t seem all that close, even if they are in the same ballpark. It’ll happen soon enough, but not in the next day.

For Evans’ sake, I hope it gets done soon (in case of injury), while in the Bills’ case, I hope he doesn’t have another craptastic season after getting a giant deal!

~K

by Kurupt on Sep 5, 2008 9:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Swami Impostor

Chris “circle the wagons” Berman picked the Seahawks to go to the Super Bowl vs. Colts!

by the Skycap on Sep 5, 2008 7:18 PM EDT   0 recs

His predictions mean as much as ours

I wonder what would happen if ESPN gave their analists $10,000 if they got their beginning of the season SB pick right?

by Joe P. on Sep 5, 2008 8:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

all the bums in the NY Daily News, except 1, picked the Seahawks this week.

~K

by Kurupt on Sep 5, 2008 9:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Give me a break.

Never forget 56-10. Revenge.

by SuperFan82 on Sep 5, 2008 7:37 PM EDT   0 recs

A break from reporting the truth?

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 8:36 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Brian,

" you’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

by Joe P. on Sep 5, 2008 8:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah, I guess… still, I’d like to hear more from Nick about why he should be getting a break. :)

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 9:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I was just messing with you

I thought you might find the Star Wars reference amusing :-) Must have been channeling the dark side!

by Joe P. on Sep 5, 2008 9:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh no… it was appreciated. Don’t get me wrong, ANY Star Wars reference here is appreciated. By me, at least.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 6, 2008 7:05 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

What's your issue here?

Just because you don’t want to believe it, doesn’t mean it’s not true.

It all makes perfect sense. An injury that could be very minor, or take some time. The team doesn’t know how long, so they chose not to risk having only 5 LB’s available. Ok, makes sense, though it’s not what we all expected or wanted to hear/believe.

Crowell’s not in the future plans. I think that was pretty obvious even before the past few days.

The other players upset with him for doing it so close to the season. Again, makes perfect sense.

I don’t see what your issue is here….

~K

by Kurupt on Sep 5, 2008 9:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Ok, makes sense, though it’s not what we all expected or wanted to hear/believe.

That’s the most important point here. It’s not like my source, the Bills or myself are skipping over this. The Bills understand that Ellison has limitations; if they didn’t, Ellison would have been starting over Crowell, plain and simple. Sometimes the right decision isn’t the popular decision.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 5, 2008 9:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Retalitory Action

If this was not a retalitory action then why did the FO not wait 48 hours and see. I dont understand why they couldn’t wait until Saturday morning to make this decision and sleep on it a couple nights. Maybe the injury was more severe than I realize…its possible. But another possibility is that someone made a rash quick emotional based decision that now needs to be covered up. Since all injuries are not absolute a team doctor could easily say the longest possible time frame and therefore someone who made a bad decision will save face. I felt uncomfortable at how quick he was placed on the IR…maybe I am wrong and the injury was serious but I would feel more comforable as a fan if they had slept on it for a night or two so I at least felt they fully thought it through. I rarely (if ever) have knocked the Bills new front office since Donahoe left but this leaves a bad taste in my mouth for the first time in a long time.

by Berg79 on Sep 5, 2008 10:13 PM EDT   0 recs

I dont understand why they couldn’t wait until Saturday morning to make this decision and sleep on it a couple nights.

I tried to explain that, but perhaps I didn’t do a good enough job. Once Crowell made the decision to have surgery, the Bills had to decide between gambling a roster spot on him and an injury that, given the intricacies of rehab, could heal in anywhere between 2 to 14 weeks, or NOT doing that. Ultimately, they decided that playing a man short for possibly up to 3 months wasn’t a risk they wanted to take; I’m not saying I’m thrilled with that decision, but I can certainly understand the logic behind it.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 6, 2008 7:10 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

pft

this is frick’n weird….and until I get some real answers I’m so frick’n skeptical of the FO right now

MARVelous

by MARVelous on Sep 6, 2008 1:25 AM EDT   0 recs

Again, Crowell made his decision to get a second opinion after the Bills placed him on IR, likely in an attempt to get a doctor’s backing that he’s not damaged goods heading into free agency next off-season. There’s really nothing weird about it.

by Brian Galliford on Sep 6, 2008 7:11 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Daily updates on the Buffalo Bills, featuring opinions, analysis, news updates and the most thorough community of Bills fans on the Internet.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Phinsider160_small
Got Dolphins Questions?
Homersimpson3_small
Who to Root For: Week 13 Edition

Recent FanPosts

Small
Off Season Moves
Greenman_small
Go all run!
Buffalo2_033_small
A possibility of 13 coaching changes?
Joker-marmalard3_small
Dick Jauron's Press Conference
Homersimpson3_small
Week 13 Results and Playoff Implications
Small
Marty Schotenheimer
000_mv5bmtq2nzg1ndexnf5bml5banbnxkftztywmte5mdm2
Why???????
Small
The debate is over...Jauron's time is up
M_image
The Mike Holmgren Effect

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Executive Editor

Dawesome_copy_small Brian Galliford

The Triumvirate

Daffy_duck_small jri111

Joker-marmalard3_small Kurupt

Kenny_blankenship_small sireric

Analyst

Dynamics_small Ron From NM

ad

Site Meter