Mario Williams is likely going to play his last game as a member of the Buffalo Bills on Sunday, as he is expected to be cut during this upcoming offseason.
Tyler Dunne of the Buffalo News wrote a post about the apparent disdain defensive end Mario Williams has for the Buffalo Bills organization. The Associated Press reported on Thursday that a member of the Bills organization close to the personnel department said anonymously that the Bills will move on from Williams this upcoming offseason. Williams signed a six-year, $100 million contract to play for Buffalo in 2012. He would earn over $11 million with the Bills in 2016.
Dunne questions what drove Williams’ discontentment with the Bills organization. Was it scheme fit in Rex Ryan’s blitz heavy defensive front? Did he check out mentally on the Bills long ago?
A player who wishes to remain anonymous told the Buffalo News the following about Williams.
“It’s been clear to me that Mario doesn’t care about anybody but himself. He followed that up by not giving any effort during the season and complaining about the scheme instead of manning up and saying he played like crap and doesn’t care. He is totally checked out.”
Williams doesn’t want to blitz on every down like it is almost required in Ryan’s defensive scheme. While Williams would have preferred to have been a situational pass rusher, his lofty contract doesn’t give him that luxury to take defensive plays off. He comes across as a malcontent and his teammate wasn’t the least bit shy in giving Dunne his opinion on his likely to be ex-teammate.
Should the Bills part ways with Williams at the end of the season, he will become an interesting piece on the free agent market. While he is the former No. 1 overall pick of the Houston Texans in 2006, his questioned effort and acrimonious relationship with the Bills organization will surely cost him the big bucks he was going to keep on making in Buffalo. Teams will certainly love his talent and maybe a change of scenery is best for all parties involved.
Add us as a preferred source on Google