hondo in seattle

"Super Bowl Proves Best Team Doesn't Always Win" (then proceeds to recommend a best of five championship)

Sully seems to think his rude questions are hard, probing inquiries. They're not. Often he doesn't seem to accomplish anything other than antagonizing the athlete or coach. Which probably explains why Sully has so few inside sources.

I believe Hurt won an Oscar and had three more Oscar nominations after Body Heat, not to mention a very active/lucrative career. Maybe that's Utah John's point. Maybe he's suggesting Kaep will do better after SF than before???

On the one hand, TT showed promise. And lots of QBs get better with game experience. I'm hoping TT takes a big step forward in 2016. On the other hand, TE and JP once showed promise too. As has been pointed out in other threads, Green Bay, NE, and other winning franchises continue to draft QBs even when they have an established starter. We should do the same even though Tyrod performed surprisingly well last season. But.... Why do we have yet another TT thread?

This is absolutely correct. But no human being is necessarily doomed to repeat his mistakes. Rex has been successful in the past because he's spent a lifetime learning about defensive schemes and football leadership. Some of those lessons were clearly misapplied last season. While I don't know what next season holds for us, I don't think it's completely unrealistic to think Rex will learn from his 2015 mistakes. There are also the questions of (1) how long does it take to sell a team on a new philosophy?, and (2) how long does it take to teach a team a new philosophy? Bart Scott and Coach Cowher raised these issues in Dunne's article. I'm not a huge Rex fan but I don't think you can label the guy a hopeless failure after just one season.

It seems like this might be the best play for his guy now. He clearly overplayed his hand when he demanded $1 million. With the 50th anniversary come and gone, the tape doesn't have much value. I still don't get why the NFL is horrible for deciding they didn't want to pay $1 million dollars. There's no obligation for them to buy it. They just decided it wasn't worth that much and passed. Am I a bad guy when I decide to drive past McDonalds without stopping to buy something from them?

Hope is what we Bills fans live on. I guess I liked Dunne's article because the Bart Scott quotes gave me a bit more hope than I had before. Scott seems to have faith in Rex and his D. Maybe I should too.

I don't think anyone is debating this. The question is: why? Because Rex is a clueless windbag? Because Rex tried to build a hybrid D he didn't really believe in? Because Rex didn't get buy-in from the players? Because Rex tried to install too much of complicated D too fast? Because __________________________ (you fill in the blank)?

The NFL owns the rights to the game. Why would they surrender those rights? If somebody taped your wedding and wanted to make money selling the tape, wouldn't you object? Curiously, the guy owns the tapes but not the content on the tapes. Funny situation. The market always dictates the value of something. In this case, there's not much of a market. Maybe some rich ex-player or Packer fan might want to own something like this. But the tapes are incomplete, damaged, and can't be broadcast. This guy mistakenly thought he had something worth $1 million. Apparently, he was very wrong. Let's see if he can even find someone willing to pay more than the NFL's offer of $30,000.

I thought it was a good article because I expect a sports writer to piece together quotes into a coherent whole. In this case, I really don't care about Tyler Dunne's opinion of Rex and his D. What does Dunne actually know? But I do care about Bart Scott's opinion - Bart knows Rex and his D very well. Clearly, Rex failed last year on defense. We want to know why. Some here simplistically suggest Rex just isn't very bright or talented - despite a track record that says otherwise and despite the praise he receives from former players and fellow coaches. Thanks to Dunne's article, we have a couple other theories. Scott thinks the problem was with buy-in. Cowher suggests the problem might have been installing too much too fast. Both might be correct. Scott also makes an interesting argument that you beat elite, quick-release QBs wtih coverage, not with sacks. Considering Scott played for Rex, I'm assuming this is Rex's opinion too. Interesting stuff.

I used to be on the every-year-until-you-find-the-right-one bandwagon. But developing a young QB can become problematic if a new QB joins the squad every year. Plus I think there's an advantage to leaving room on the roster for an experienced backup. Some other posters have given great examples about the Pats and Packers. The best organizations draft QBs, even when they have a solid starter. Every 2 or 3 years sounds about right to me.

Rex is networking with a bunch of NFL players, coaches and staff at the Pro Bowl. He's doing this while DW and his team of college talent evaluators are evaluating college players. I'm not sure why Sully finds fault with this, except that he just likes to whine.

Thanks for posting, PTR. I didn't know about this. Interesting experiment. Surprised to see Cottrell is still coaching.

An interesting article but I agree with Mango. You can't compare a short 16 game football season against the much, much longer seasons of basketball, baseball and hockey. I guess you could compare the parity of the NFL versus the parity of the NBA, NHL and MLB after they were 16 games into a season. But the real question is: would a soft cap, higher rookie pay, or any other changes give the NFL more parity. Urschel never successfully makes that point, though he seems to suggest it. Forget about what may or may not work for the other sports. I want to see a reasoned argument that there's a way to make the NFL better. This article doesn't have it.

There's an old saying in India, "When a pickpocket walks down the street, all he sees are pockets."

Coryell won more than 100 games as a college coach and again as a NFL coach. But that's not why he deserves to be enshrined. The guy changed football forever with "Air Coryell" and the "West Coast" offense. It was Coryell, more than anyone else, who made the QB the focal point of modern offenses. His innovations increased scoring and thus made football more exciting & popular. His coaching tree includes Joe Gibbs, Bill Walsh, John Madden (first gen), Norv Turner, and Mike Martz (2nd gen) among others. Every OC today has incorporated at least some Coryell ideas. It's been argued that the nickel and dime defenses so prevalent in modern football were developed to counter Coryell's offensive innovations. So Coryell, in the end, revolutionized both offensive and defensive football. Giving his influence on the game, I'm not sure how Coryell doesn't deserve a spot in Canton.

If Dungy lost a lot of playoff games, it's because he went to the playoffs a lot. And each year all but one playoff run ends in a loss. In other words, the vast majority of good coaches end their seasons with a playoff loss. The bad coaches end up without playoff appearances. Dungy, on the other hand, is the only HC in NFL history to go to the playoffs 10 consecutive years. Think of all the great coaches in NFL history who can't match that feat. It's pretty amazing, especially when you consider Dungy did it with two different teams. He has a 139-69 lifetime record as a HC. IMHO, he's very HOF worthy. One of the most worthy on this year's list. And I'm hoping The Snake gets in as an old-timer.

Clearly one of the best wideouts of his generation. So, yeah, HOF.

Typical Sully article... No new insights, lots of negativity. Why did I click the link?

It sucks to be a Raider fan.

It still bugs me that OJ is underrated in the national media as a running back. Other than Jim Brown, I really don't think there's ever been a back in the league as dangerous with a football in his hands. I hate when people talk about Emmit Smith, AP, or whoever as if they were better than OJ. I remember the joy and excitement we as fans felt when OJ took a handoff. In his prime, OJ was magical as a running back. But I agree with the rookie about taking his name down. OJ is a murderer and kidnapper. CTE or not, he's not someone we should celebrate. It's disrespect to his victims. And it's not good for our children to see a man like him so honored.

You're right, YPA is not the whole story - but it is part of the story. When Roman called a pass play, TT was effective running it. What more can you ask of him? Dude mentioned yards and TDs. Obvoiusly, TT isn't going to produce a lot of either if Roman isn't calling his number. But when pass plays were called, TT averaged 8 yards per attempt which is very good. The kid, in his first year, was effective at what he was asked to do. I think that earns him another year as the starter. Let's see if he can move his game forward.

When talking about continuity, I can't help but think of the Steelers. The've had 3 coaches over the past 46 years. They've won 60% of their games during that span and 6 Super Bowls. In the 1940's, Pittsburgh went through 6 coaches over the decade and won just 38% of their games. When they decided continuity matters, their fortunes changed.

DW is in the kitchen with Rex cooking up a stew. It'll be interesting to see what they serve us fans this season. Hope it's better than last year's cafeteria food.

Very true. I guess then if you compare TT with Kelly highlights, then TT falls far short. I do remember Kelly's rookie year. Despite Kelly playing pro ball in the USFL before coming to the Bills, he didn't yet look like a polished superstar. Some fans that year didn't think he was a franchise QB either.