Cynical

"Found these stats posted by Balto at WPI (he didn't link to where he got them, so I'll just have to take his word for their accuracy) and thought it would be an interesting conversation piece:" AND "The second thing that jumps out at you is Jason Peters, LT for the Bills going to the Pro Bowl while giving up the most sacks of any other LT in the NFL (11.5) in only 13 sacks." So, to re-iterate, this guys whole analysis is based on stat he himself cannot verify the accuracy of. Yeah, he knows.

You haven't supplied enough info to give you a really informed opinion, but based on the info you did give: 2004. Without question.

Second.

This does not automatically equate to Doug Flutie being a good QB. During their SB year, the Ravens won more under Trent Dilfer than they did under Tony Banks. Based on Flake logic: Trent Dilfer must be a good QB. See response to A. Based on your own admission, Flutie alone did not do it. Therefore, if he was not alone, than he alone is NOT the reason for the success. Reference: Trent Dilfer, Tony Banks, 2000 Baltimore Ravens 2 hypothetical questions: If the Bills did NOT have a great defense, do you think the Bills would have achieved the same record? If the Bills had John Elway as QB, do you think the Bills would have achieved a similar record? A. I am not an RJ supporter. Your assumption was wrong. B. Regarding NASA and Neil Armstrong, nobody has ever stated the reason a man walked on the moon was due to Neil Armstrong. Contrast that with the Flake insistence Doug Flutie saved the franchise. C. Yes, Flutie was QB of the TEAM that made the playoffs. But that does not automatically equate to Doug Flutie being a good QB. Reference: Trent Dilfer, Tony Banks, 2000 Baltimore Ravens Just ask Trent Dilfer and the 2000 Baltimore Ravens. HOPE THIS HELPS!

What part of "team" don't you get? Suites and tickets were sold because the "team" won. Flutie just happened to be the QB. Why is it so hard to grasp that if the "team" had won without Flutie, the Bills still would have sold the suites, etc ...? It is the most basic concept of football capitalism: win games, sell tickets.

And I think if I had played the lotto last night, I would have won.

A huge ego can be a problem major problem if: The player doesn't have the abilities to back it up The player cannot recognize or refuses to recognize he can/did screw up, or is playing poorly These were Fluties problems. When he was playing poorly, and was called out on it, he never hesitated in pointing fingers at other players, and their mistakes. And if those 3 INTS were because of you, you better accept the blame. Pointing out the failures of somebody else without taking responsibility for your own failures does not create a harmonious working relationship.

Yeah, God knows these players take such a beating during the OTAs

That would depend on what you are looking at. I'll take his first season in Buffalo over his second all the time every time. While he didn't have the yardage (he didn't play in every game either), his other numbers were better. Better accuracy, more TDs, less turnovers, better pass average, etc ...

And you would breathe a sigh of relief if the Bills starting DT's went on IR? How about the DE's?

Fixed it for you.

I never said pro football was that simple. You attempted to show there was no correlation, and you failed. The correlation does exist. Now, go waste your time trying to figure out why Jauron coached teams tend to lose. Develop your little theories and concepts. When each one fails, you will create another new excuse in defense of Jauron. Meanwhile, the rest of us have already looked, and have concluded all we need to look at is the big picture. Dick Jauron is a loser. In pro football, like real life, sometimes the most obvious answer and the most obvious solution are the most correct. Jauron coach team, team lose.

Fixed it.

You're partially right. This is no correlation among ALL 3 items. Just like there is no correlation among ALL of the following 3 items: Jauron coach team, defense gets 6 turnovers and scores 2 TDs, team lose. That's because the middle item in both examples are extraneous. The result was the same. But there is one constant in both examples: JAURON coach TEAM, TEAM lose. It was like that in 4 out 5 years in Chicago, and 3 out 3 years in Buffalo. 2 different teams. 2 different ownership 2 different coaching staffs 2 different rosters 2 different sets of divisional opponents 1 constant Jauron coach team, team lose. That is a very direct correlation.

Like coaching a team to a winning record 1 season out of 8.

You are so confused, you have no clue what you are talking about: Whitner was drafted #8 overall in 2006 McKelvin was drafted #11 overall in 2007 Byrd was drafted in the 2nd round in 2009 That's THREE in the first 2 rounds in 4 years. By why stop at just the first 2 rounds? Lets count them all up in 2006, they drafted 3 DB in 2007, they drafted 1 DB in 2008, they drafted 3 more DBs in 2009, they drafted 4 more DBs Total drafted: 11 DBs Total # of draftees: 34 That makes almost one third of all draftees were DBs since the Dick has been here. ONE THIRD. Throw in 2 first rounds and 1 second, and it almost becomes sickening Note: that does not include free agent DBs such as Florence Secondly, Butler was drafted in 2006 Fowler was signed in 2006 Walker and Dockery were both signed in 2007.

It will be easier to pay two contracts when the stadium is full than it will be to pay for one when the stadium is less than half full.

Yes it is. Between Thurman last year (IIRC) and now Kelly, how can any rational person believe the big problem with this team is just a "lack" of talent? Those guys clearly pointed out the problem in a tactful way: the problem is coaching, specifically, the HC. The HC dictates the philosophy and system of how everything works on a team. Even good players can become complacent when it becomes evident nobody is held accountable for individual mediocre effort.

This quote stuck out like a sore thumb. With all the changes we have seen this off season, this will be Jauron's swan song as a HC. Ralph just handed DJ the rope he will swing by. Excuse time is over.

I wonder how many of the same people stating they would never take him as a coach NOW, would have defended him if he won those SB as the HC of the Bills.

Can I mail order her ...

Just a guess, 1 winning season out of 8? A pathetic record vs. the better teams during the year? A collapse so epic, the Bills are only the third team in the history of the NFL to do it? So what? Again, so what? We know what kind of HC we have now. A suck ass one. If we cannot have an established winner, I'll take my chances with an up and comer. Heck, the Bills could end up with the next Bill Cowher.

Actually, we need something pinned and can be updated when needed. That way, we can just click on the thread and instantaneously know who's been bad and who's been good.

See if you can follow along: 1978 - HC of KC => 1 1979 - HC of KC => 2 1980 - HC of KC => 3 1981 - HC of KC => 4 1982 - HC of KC => 5 1983 - Was not a HC in the NFL => still sitting at 5 1984 - Was not a HC in the NFL => still sitting at 5 1985 - Was not a HC in the NFL => still sitting at 5 1986 - Took over as HC for the Bills during the season => wasn't a full season, but we will say it is, 6 1987 - Bills HC => 7 1988 - Bills HC => 8 Looks like you are off. Even if you count it your way, you are still off.