Mikie2times

My new favorite insult for people

In hindsight do you feel the experts were totally off base or we overachieved?

Out of curiosity, when you have Josh Allen at QB and face the below, what do you expect the outcome to be? It's silly for either side of the argument to keep pretending no argument exists. If you want to disagree, so be it, but valid points on each side. QB"s with at least 2 starts since 2020 Miami Tua Tagovailoa Jacoby Brissett Ryan Fitzpatrick Teddy Bridgewater Skylar Thompson Tyler Huntley New York Aaron Rodgers Zach Wilson Trevor Siemian Tim Boyle Mike White Joe Flacco Sam Darnold New England Cam Newton Drake Maye Jacoby Brissett Mac Jones Bailey Zappe Allen must be underperforming then

Given the defenses speed over size approach, 4-2-5 base, you would think an elite one tech could transform the entire defense. Imagine our run defense being solidified. LB's being more clean. Ed left to penetrate. This has been a major fail by leadership from what I can see. In times when Jones has played well, early on with Star, and even when Joseph was signed it was clear that role can really make an impact.

Again, quality post. Certainly for every team it's the combination of talent and coaching. In my mind McD doesn't fall that far outside another beloved Buffalo coach, Marv Levy. Levy was able to accomplish something pretty remarkable in the resilience, character, and consistency he was able to instill in those teams. I know it taught me a life lesson or two. He was a hall of fame coach. But ultimately, was he good enough in the X's and O's, roster/player development, assistant coaching decisions, draft contributions, and all those other things? Probably not. I know a lot of Bills fans look at Marv as one of the main reasons we never won one. With this team and Allen, we have considerable talent as well. If I have a degree of hope with McD it's just that I don't feel that talent resides on the side of the ball he specializes in. But at the same time he very well could be a large part of the reason why. We just don't know. Further, not many great coaches have had an MVP QB and never been to a Super Bowl. It sort of ups the anti a little bit by having a guy like Josh. As it upped the anti for Marv having Bruce, Thurman, Andre, Jim, etc. Allen is really what puts the pressure on McD and I think it's what gives clarity to the bold part. When you have a guy like Allen, I don't know that you can be considered great unless certain things happen. Winning a Super Bowl, going to a Super Bowl. Perhaps more forgiveness exists with a lesser QB. But I'm not sure any great coaches exist that haven't been to a championship game with an MVP QB. McD to me is still not in Levy's class yet, but in the same mold. Which certainly isn't bad company, but might not be championship company.

I would say, what good is your culture if you cant draft the somewhat troubled BPA? As far as McD goes, I think if this keeps going and we repeat the last 4 years again, I think you really need to just look at change for the sake of it. It's not about being good or bad. It's just refreshing the routines, systems, and voices. Larry Bird once said every 3 years a team should replace it's HC. For 90% of coaches the most they should have is 3 years. After that players just don't hear you the same way. You don't impact the team the same way as you once did. All of which makes sense. What I hope we don't see is something like a Landry, Shula, Harbaugh or Tomlin where the HC basically takes up a permanent post. That is not a good model IMO. All 4 of those guys won a Super Bowl, but after the last SB appearance they have gone 448-301 in the regular season, 47 separate seasons, and no Super Bowl appearances. It seems like many of the McD proponents are arguing for that type of stability/approach without actually saying it. I at least want to find out if that is what they see in the scenario I provided.

I appreciate the thought out post. My question was phrased a specific way and I don't see you explicitly stating an answer. I can infer from the post that your answer is as long as McD keeps showing growth he has an indefinite amount of time. Growth from the perspective you're stating doesn't seem to be anchored to a clear result as far as I can tell and more to continued improvements. I guess that's a bit tricky given how close and how far we have come. One could argue how much more improving can we make without actually getting to the Super Bowl? I will ask it in a very clear way. If the Bills go to multiple AFC championship games and a couple divisional games and never miss the playoffs the next 4 years, but don't make a Super Bowl, is McD still your guy?

I spent about the last 1000 posts trying to prove a case could and likely should be made for moving on, but man is that negative. It's just not worth all the posts from my perspective. At the same time, I think it's fair to ask his supporters where does the line get drawn? We have had as much regular season success as any major sports franchise since 2020, but we did that in the 90's as well. I hear people dismiss the postseason as the "tournament" but from my perspective, more often than not, the best team does in fact win the Super Bowl. It doesn't happen every time, but most of the time it's how it unfolds. I think it's very fair to ask if we did the same thing all over again the next 4 years, would it be enough to these posters? If the answer is yes, and it would seem likely it has to be (given what points are made by his supporters) then these threads and all the debates involved are kind of pointless. It would just show a fundamental difference in how both groups look at success and what they ultimately want. So again, really curious how McD's supporters feel about this. Winning is fun, losing is not fun, I like to have fun. But at the end of the day I really want just one. To me that has to be the goal. Eventually I feel like you can't ride the same horse who hasn't been able to accomplish that forever. Maybe some feel you can or you should. I would like to hear perspective on that if that is the case.

Shoot him behind the barn and tell the kids he ran away.

These takes from the church of McD effectively allow him to remain our HC as long as he's successful in the regular season. Nothing that is being said by any of his supporters wouldn't be able to be said again in another 5 years without a Super Bowl. Given we have an MVP level QB, regular season success seems more likely than not. I would be curious at what point his supporters would be alright saying, ok, I have had enough? How many years of not reaching a Super bowl is "enough" for those that are supporting him? Or does that even matter to you? As an example if we repeat the last 4 years the next 4 years is that ok for you? Perhaps that will help people get some perspective on your outlook with this.

I wonder if Richie could file a civil damages claim

Perhaps. How he avoids the pass rush with his legs, scrambles in many of the "got to have it moments", and his off script and extended plays are things I'm not sure he can do long term. Those are young mans tools but have been such a huge part of his game. It's weird to think what would become of a Josh Allen who never leaves the pocket. Ben Roethlisberger is probably a likely comp as he ages. Some people talk about Ben now and it's a bit off the mark. Allen has more athleticism in his toe.

I expect it will be explosive

The year prior to Sean (you know with that dumpster fire rex) we finished +21 in point differential and went 7-9. The following year we finished -57 in point differential and went 9-7. Good for Sean that his -57 point differential was enough to defeat the Pythagorean Theorem gods. I believe that team has one of the worst point differentials in NFL history to make the playoffs. Either way, if Dalton doesn't complete that pass it's just another drought era year. We finished 9-7 with Doug Marrone and Mike Mularkey, 9-7 just wasn't good enough those years. The following year we went 6-10 for a -105 point differential. We only had a -100 point differential 3 seasons in the entire drought era. He has a losing record without Josh Allen. So no, I don't think he is signifgantly better then a drought era coach. His floor is likely higher because he's so good on turnover differential but ultimately without Allen, he would have bounced around .500 football as most do. As the data says he would do. As many of our drought era coaches did. I think you perceive this as an insult to him, which it isn't. He's good enough to win a Super Bowl. Give some of those drought coaches an MVP QB and stacked roster and some of them would have been as well. As of now he only has the MVP QB and not the stacked roster and that's a factor in this as well.