2003Contenders

There is some truth to that. Of course, even when Kelly played there were some fans (albeit a minority of them) that wanted to run HIM out of town too! LOL

Let's be honest. Aside from Bledsoe's great first half in 2002, QB has been a problem for the Bills, since Jim Kelly retired. (I am not forgetting about Flutie either; he managed the offense just well enough to win most games when backed by a stellar defense). I have to admit that I found myself drinking the Trent Edwards koolaide after the 5-1 start. He appeared to have turned the corner and was doing more than just managing the game -- he was actually winning it in the 4th quarter. There are a number of theories for his regression, all of which probably bear some merit: 1. The severe concussion he received in the Arizona game. This would seem to lose credibility when observing that Trent actually had his best day as a professional in his very next start against the Chargers. Of course, the OL did such a good job that day of protecting him that I don't believe he was even touched. Also, look back at that SD game and observe that as error-free as he played, the Bills' offense didn't exactly explode for 40 points. 2. Facing opponents that were familiar with him. Throwing out the Arizona game, in which he played less than a full series, one common denominator with the 4 teams the Bills beat was the fact that none of them had played against Trent before. Beginning with the division free-fall against Miami, all of the opponents had played against him before -- and knew his tendencies. This is not uncommon for a 2nd year player, which is why the notion of a "Sophomore Jinx" exists. It's like a young pitcher in baseball that gets hit hard the 2nd or 3rd time through the batting order. 3. The infamous failure against 3-4 defenses. This certainly spelled doom in the division, as all three of the division foes ran this style of defense. I am still not sure why he struggled so much against this base defense. Was it just coincidence? Or some of #2 I listed above as well? 4. Coaching let him down. Remember, AVP and Turk were both rookies in their respective roles. Will a year of taking their bumps help them mature in year 2? Or are they just over-matched? Also, by his very nature, Dick Jauron is always going to play it close to the vest. His motto seems to be; Keep it close and try to win in the 4th quarter. That's why you are, unfortunately, never going to see one of his teams leading the league in scoring. Even that explosion against KC had a great deal to do with the aberration of turnovers forced by the defense. 5. Key injuries, especially to Josh Reed. When Reed went down, I don't think Trent trusted the other young WRs that had to step up. That was most evident in the Cleveland game, when his confidence seemed shot and he just couldn't pull the trigger. When Bill Parcells was out of football in 2007, he had some great bits of wisdom that he shared on ESPN. Basically he said that a team should have a 4 year cycle plan for a QB. Year 1 you can throw out, since the young man is a rookie and is bound to experience growing pains. Year 2 you need to see positive progression. By Year 3 the QB had better take control of the team -- if not, then you know that you need to find an alternative in Year 4. Obviously the Bills subscribe to this same theory as no QB since Kelly has been a starter for more than 3 years in a row! 2009 is Trent's make or break year. If he can't progress beyond what we saw at the BEGINNING of 2008, then we need to think about upgrading the position in 2010.

What we really need is simply a WR that runs precise routes and catches the ball when it hits his hands. I could live with another Josh Reed, for example. I've said before that it really seemed like Trent's struggles coincided with Reed going down, as the young QB couldn't trust the young WRs to run their routes. Since Roscoe is really more or less a #4 WR, lets just hope that Stevie Johnson can continue to progress and that Hardy has been watching plenty of film during his rehab.

Whether you agree with it or not, the coaches seem pretty well sold on having Trent as the starting QB. So please do not get your hopes up expecting them to bring in someone from free agency that would pose a legitimate challenge to his role as the starter. Rather, I expect them to bring in a serviceable veteran who may have some starting experience in the past and COULD start in a pinch should Trent get hurt. Someone like Charlie Batch, Chris Simms, or Ryan Fitzpatrick. They won't be entertaining anyone like Kurt Warner, Jeff Garcia, Kerry Collins or even Byron Leftwich who will be looking for the chance to compete for the starting job. They certainly won't be trading for someone like Anderson. Besides, I don't know that I like Anderson any better than Trent to tell you the truth. Now, if there is a possibility of acquiring a Kellen Winslow, Braylon Edwards or Joe Thomas ...

For those of you that may not be familiar with his term in Chicago, Dick Jauron really DID perform better than his record would suggest. He really came into a bad situation in Chicago, cleaning up the mess that Dave Wannstadt (who had been given too much power in personnel decisions) had left behind. By 2001, the Bears finished 13-3 and Jauron was named Coach of the Year. They came crashing back down to earth in 2002 for a variety of reasons, partly because they had seriously over achieved the year before. Remember, the Bears essentially played every game in 2002 on the road as their "home" games were relocated to Indiana. Many observers actually thought he had his BEST coaching performance the following season (2003), when the team dealt with a ridiculous number of injuries en route to a better-than-expected 7-9 finish. He was fired largely because Angelo wanted HIS guy in place. As for his time in Buffalo, I thought Jauron's first two seasons were very similar to that final season with the Bears. That is, I felt that he did a pretty good job with damage control and having the team well-prepared most weeks. That a JP Losman-led team could be challenging for a Playoff spot as late as Week 16 in 2006 tells you something. Erratic QB play was certainly a challenge the past two seasons. Despite how this may come across to some haters, I am NOT a Jauron apologist. He certainly made some bad decisions in various games last season -- and bears a fair amount of blame for the collapse that occurred after the 5-1 start. He has also shown a propensity to stick with weak OCs, which has resulted in a history of poor offensive play. Still, I would have to say that in his 3 seasons with the Bills, Jauron has done a decent enough job in 2+ of those years -- and gets a failing grade in his third. Should the 2008 collapse have cost him his job? There are certainly a number of people with respectable opinions that believe that it should have. Considering the youth of the team, that it was Turk's first year as an OC and essentially Trent's first full year as a starter, I am willing to side with Ralph and give Jauron another year.

Yea. For all of the grief that Kiper gets around here, the team may very well have been better served if they had followed his advice at the time. I remember in 2003, he really thought the Bills should take Dallas Clark or Jason Witten and was shocked to see them take McGahee. He thought Ngata was a no-brain pick in 2006, although he didn't hate the Whitner selection. He did, however, hate the trade up for McCargo.

It is hard to say, given the varying degrees of latitude that different coaches have and the amount of talent on each team. However, I would rather have Jauron than any of the following: Marvin Lewis, Jim Zorn, Mora, and Del Rio. There are certainly about a half dozen other coaches (BB, Reid, Whisenhunt, Tomlin, Fisher, Coughlin, Fox) that I would prefer to have. Personally, I believe that the verdict is still out on all of the rest, including the rookie coaches that just led their teams to the playoffs. (Remember, the Bills finished 9-7 under Mularky in his first year after an 0-4 start. I don't think too many Bills fans were sad to see him go after 2005.) I see Jauron in pretty much the same realm as the rest (Wade, Norv, etc.). All in all, I guess what I am getting at is that, while certainly not in the company of elite coaches, Jauron is not as absolutely dreadful as some make him out to be. He is the definition of middle of the road. Look at it this way: Jauron managed to beat 7 different head coaches this year (5 of whom were later fired/retired), while losing to 6.

While I certainly believe that we could stand to upgrade the TE position, I think an offensive improvement that would go much further is finding a stud Center -- one that can handle the big 3-4 DTs in our division.

A team like Washington or Dallas that is fortunate enough to exist in a large market (and coincidentally has an owner with very large pockets) can afford to make bad decisions with player contracts, tear the contracts up and then start again. Unfortunately, the Bills are not in the same situation. Even worse than letting the wrong players leave (i.e. Pat Williams) is the opposite mistake of overpaying for players (i.e. Dockery, 2nd edition of Peerless Price , Kelsay) that do not live up to expectations. When so much money is tied to players like these, it literally takes YEARS to recover from bad contracts. It is certainly a double-edged sword. I applaud the current regime's steadfastness in trying to build the team through the draft, and by and large they have done a pretty decent job of acquiring young talent. The problem comes when so many of the young players are allowed to enter the free agent market -- and the draft then becomes a means of back-filling for the soon-to-be gone young veterans. That is why it seems like we keep having to draft a CB in the first round every year. Winfield, Clements -- and now maybe Greer (and/or McGee next year) were all allowed to walk. All of these players had to be replaced via top draft picks. Now, I can't exactly fault the front office with their decision(s) to let both Winfield and Clements go. Both clearly were after the big dollars, and there wasn't much that could have been done to keep them in the fold. One could argue that perhaps the front office could have signed them BEFORE they were eligible for free agency and got more bang for their buck. Isn't that what they tried to do with Jason Peters? For the most part, the team has done a pretty good job of retaining the right players without breaking the bank. The most notable exception is obviously Chris Kelsay, when the team decided to pay for potential rather than performance. The other problem is that since Buffalo isn't a glamor city and since the team hasn't made the playoffs in 10 years, it is more difficult to attract the big name free agents. That means that the team really isn't in the position of shopping for bargains. They either wind up with players that are not coveted by other teams -- or overpaying for players that are somewhat in demand. Was Derrick Dockery worth the money that the Bills paid him? Of course not. But the team was looking for an impact OG -- and they paid what they had to to get him. Unfortunately, he hasn't been the impact player that we hoped for. Moreover, the ridiculous contract dwarfed that of another, more worthy player by the name of Jason Peters -- which certainly played a role in his decision to hold out. The best way for this team to get better at making the right decisions, like it or not, is to continue to build some stability and continuity. Everyone talks about the Pittsburgh, and certainly they should be a model for the Bills to follow. Every year the team loses key free agents, but their front office is savvy enough to know which guys they can live without. It makes a difference that the turnover in the front office and coaching ranks has been so limited over the decades. The Bills have a great opportunity before them this off-season. They have made the decision to maintain the status quo in the coaching ranks, dispelling another year of rebuilding. Through smart budget constraint, they have placed themselves in a sound financial position, especially against the salary cap. They do not have many key free agent departures looming -- and settling the Jason Peters situation for once and for all and locking up either Greer or McGee long term would help solidify their position even more so. That way they can look toward the draft and free agency to help improve this team at key positions (OC, TE, OLB/DE, WR) rather than back-filling for other positions.

Ditto. I also made the mistake of adding an expensive McGahee jersey to my repertoire. Only the classics from now on...

Jimmy Johnson recently said that it was by shear fluke that the Cowboys even practiced and prepared for those shuttle passes, which were not a part of the Bills offensive package at that time. He was watching a news clip from the Bills practice and noticed Kelly flipping the ball like that to Thurman. Uggg. It just wasn't meant to be, I guess. Here are some of the plays that I still have nightmares about in addition to the ones already cited: Super Bowl XXV 1. The entire series AFTER the safety. The Bills had all of the momentum. They had the ball in very good field position. Then Andre Reed dropped two VERY catchable passes, which led to a 3-and-out. A TD (or even a FG) there puts the Bills up enough that the Giants would have been more of a desperate mode, which was NOT their style. Instead, they end teh half with a 8 or 9 minute drive to pull within 2 and start the second half in similar fashion. 2. The McKellar shoestring catch which was originally called incomplete -- but was reviewed and called a catch by the officials. We were out of timeouts and the catch only netted a few yards. It wound up hurting us because the team had to run to the line, waste valuable seconds -- and spike the ball (thereby losing a down). No one remembers that play because the next one, the third down play, was the great draw by Thurman that set up the ill-fated FGA. Super Bowl XXVI 1. Just in general, the enormous number of dropped passes in that game. 2. Also, in general, the inability of the DL to put any pressure on Rypien at all. I think they sacked him on the first drive -- but he went practically untouched the rest of the game. That was one of the all time great OLs that we went up against -- and our DL was coached by Chuck Dickerson, who was promptly fired after the game. 3. Of all of the SBs I have come to peace the most with that one, simply because the Redskins were a better team overall. Super Bowl XXVII 1. The 3rd down smack-down that Ken Norton put on Thurman (or was it Kenny Davis?) inside the one yard line. That led to the 4th down play that started the flood of turnovers in that game, when Kelly threw the interception in the endzone. People forget that the Bilsl actually led that game 10-0 at one time. A TD there would have likely brought about a different result. Super Bowl XXVIII 1. Like everyone else, I have to go with the early 3rd quarter fumble. The team is ahead by a TD. They get the ball first in the second half. Aikman is not having an especially great game. The offense is moving the ball pretty well on that drive... and then... and then... You could just sense the team deflate. "here we go again!" they were obviously thinking. The Cowboys tie the game, Thurman goes into a shell, the offense recoils, and the Cowboys are able to get into a groove running the ball with Emmitt. If Thurman doesn't fumble, the Bills probably score at minimum a FG on that drive. And, if nothing else, it takes the Cowboys out of their run-first game plan.

I highly doubt that either of them is going anywhere. Actually, if Schobel regains the form he showed prior to last year, then it is hard to argue that he is actually overpaid. Kelsay is certainly a different matter. However, he appears to be so popular with his teammates and the coaching staff that I don't foresee him being let go either. I said in another thread that I believe that Kelsay will wind up being Sanders' pet project. We can dream about the growth that Kampman exhibited under Sanders, can't we?

Call me crazy but I don't think Kelsay is going anywhere. He appears to have a good relationship with his teammates, the coaching staff likes him -- and I have a feeling that he is going to be Sanders' pet project.

As much as I respect Steeler fans, who are certainly great, something dawned on me last night. There is a significant argument to be made that Kurt Warner would go into the Hall of Fame should he retire tomorrow and never play another down in the NFL. His rookie season was in 1999, which also happens to be the last time that the Bills even made it into the playoffs. Yet here we all are STILL rooting for our beloved Bills and praying that the franchise won't move. I think Bills fans are second to none.

I, for one, have NEVER understood the criticism that Jauron has received here and elsewhere for routinely deferring when the Bills win the coin flip. Practically every coach in the NFL makes the same call. It affords you the possibility of getting the ball on offense twice in a row, which can't happen if you kick off to start the second half. (Remember Super Bowl XXV, when the Bills offense was on the sideline for over an hour as the Giants ended the first half with a long drive and started the second half in similar fashion?) If the Cardinals score at the end of the half, instead of Harrison taking it the other way, the complexion of this decision changes in a big way.

One quick question for those of you that want to show Kelsay the door and are praying that Brian Orakpo is still on the board when the Bills pick at #11: Are you aware of the fact that Orakpo topped out at 5.5 sacks in his most productive year at Texas?

While Bill Parcells' axiom of "You are what your record says you are" is a truism, I tend to believe that sometimes a team can be better or worse than another team with the same record. The title of the thread is also thought-provoking in the sense that it doesn't pose the question of which team was the best -- but which season was Jauron's best. That implies to me that the question is: In which season did Jauron do his best job coaching. Obviously with the 5-1 collapse, the 0-6 record against division foes and the well-documented series of questionable decisions made toward the end of the regular season, it is rather easy to pinpoint 2008 as his worst since coaching with the Buffalo Bills. To be honest, though, prior to this season I honestly thought he did a pretty good job with the talent and the unfortunate series of injuries that he was forced to contend with. Recall that the team went 7-9 (and was in a number of other games, losing by 3 points or less to quality opponents like the Patriots, Colts and Chargers) and that was with J.P. Losman starting every game at QB. I really do believe that he did a remarkable job of damage control and hiding our deficiencies that season. 2007 was wrought with so many injuries that one could almost give him a mulligan for the less than .500 results. Count me as one of the few on this board that was not mortified by Ralph's decision to keep Jauron around for another year. Did he deserve to be fired based on his 2008 failures? Perhaps. But, as indicated above, I feel that he has done a good coaching job in 2 of his 3 seasons here. I also believe that he may have been somewhat hampered in 2008 by the amount of youth not only on the roster -- but in the front office and coaching ranks as well. Yes, Trent Edwards just completed his first full season as a starter. But will Turk learn from his mistakes as a rookie OC? How about AVP as QB Coach? With the absence of a true GM, the entire front office had to step it up a notch (especially Brandon). Might the whole organization be better prepared after their 2008 learning experience? I believe that we will learn a lot about the direction of this team based on what goes on in the off-season. Will they make prudent decisions in free agency? Will they make full use of all possible options on draft day? How will Brandon and company handle Jason Peters' likely holdout again this season?

Some quick thoughts about Kelsay without playing the defender role too much... 1. There is more to being a DE than just getting sacks: Run containment, backing off into coverage, occupying blockers, etc. Depending on the scheme and the assigned role, a quality DE could register just a couple of sacks per year and STILL be doing his job. 2. The coaching staff seems pretty happy with Kelsay, which implies that he is playing the role envisioned for him reasonably well. 3. I think Kelsay hit free agency at exactly the right time, when salaries for DEs were going through the roof. The year before the Packers had just signed Aaron Kampman to a huge contract that seemed somewhat unwarranted at the time based on past performance. However, Kampman responded with a career year. I believe that the Bills overpaid for Kelsay's services largely because they were convinced that he was on the cusp of a breakout season. If nothing else, signing him long-term prevented a team like the Patriots from picking him up. We know that BB would find a way to best utilize Kelsay's talents. 4. Like Donte Whitner, it is hard to gauge how much Kelsay's individual production on the field has been hurt by his own versatility, which was further diluted by the rash of injuries that the team has experienced the past two seasons.

Remember what happened the last time Ralph hired a former (and highly regarded) GM who was working at ESPN at the time?

Sacks aren't everything, but back in 2005 when Sanders was the DL COach (which is what we are most interested in), his Packers recorded just 35 sacks. Our Bills managed 39.

For a guy that is getting so much hype, his college stats just don't seem to back it up. We need someone capable of applying pressure to the QB on a regular basis, and I don't know that this guy is the answer based on his college production.

Signing Greer provides all kinds of flexibility. It is insurance in case McGee walks next year. It is also insurance in case McKelvin struggles in his sophomore year. It also would keep us from having to invest a high draft pick on a CB yet again in 2009 or 2010. It sounds like Greer, who is coming off a knee injury, is willing to take a home team discount. So why not oblige?

Given the (on paper) tough schedule we have in front of us in 2009, I think it is entirely possible that this team could be MUCH better this year -- and still wind up with a losing record. With the sad recent state of this frnachise, I am satisfied with progression without even grandeurs of a playoff run.

He played the role that was intended for him. If the FO thought he was worth the money they offered, I do not believe that his performance on the field would make them believe otherwise.

I just don't see how anyone can write off Edwards just yet. There were times early this season when the team was having trouble running the football, and Edwards successfully carried the offense. I know some will argue that the opponents he faced during that 5-1 stretch were odious. However, he played a near perfect game against the Chargers, the same same Chargers team that did a pretty good job holding Peyton Manning in check in the Wild Card game a couple of weeks back. Edwards certainly hit a major speed bump after that in the divisional games and showed a weakness facing 3-4 defenses. The question will be whether or not he can adapt/adjust and continue to progress. The young man clearly has the smarts and (yes) the necessary physical tools to get the job done. If we don't see a positive progression by the end of the 2009 season, then perhaps we do need to look elsewhere. One thing that would help, I believe, is bringing in a smart veteran backup that can help him -- rather than the uncoachable likes of JP Losman. I am also not sold on AVP at QB Coach either. True, he served as a rookie in that capacity and may get better with experience. The same goes for Turk. The key is that these guys need to get together and formulate a game plan that will allow them to best take advantage of the 3-4 defensive schemes that prevail in the division. After all, the way to get into the playoffs is to figure out a way to beat the teams in your division, right? Of course, some of that may involve changes in personnel, especially Center and TE.