BobChalmers

Another fan out to prove Scott Pioli right?

I saw little from Hangartner that made him look like enough of an upgrade over the too-small/weak guys we've had there the past several years. He's better, but still not great. Given the need for a really strong Center to work against the NT's in our division particularly, Wood needs to be the answer at Center if healthy, otherwise we should draft another one. As for Incognito, I'm all for tough and mean o-linemen, but this guy seems to repeatedly cross the line to just stupid and out-of-control. 15-yard personal fouls are not a way to generate offense and score points.

btw - at what point do you have to start blaming the PLAYERS in San Diego for doing so poorly in the playoffs, in particular, relative to their regular season performance? Obviously, it's not all Marty at this point.

Gailey has taken bad teams and made them good ones as an OC. Norv has done similar, but usually his success was with good teams and keeping them there. Norv had young Emmitt Smith and Troy Aikman, Chan had them when they were over the hill. Gailey's one HC stint he took ovder a 6-10 team, got them to 10-6, 8-8 in his two years, then that team went 5-11 three straight years after he was fired. Gailey made his team better. Norv has no track record (as HC) of doing that. That and their personalities are very different, and Gailey is more flexible/innovative, other than that, not they are pretty much the same. Oh - I'll give Norv credit for better hair, and Chan credit for a better complexion - does that help?

I believe this places you squarely in Scott Pioli's 'fans are too stupid to understand Gailey would be a great hire so I'll go with a young Pat's staffer' category. Thanks for proving the former Patriots GM right yet again.

Sorry - that's just not true at all. Very few 3-4 DE's are good pass rushers. Bruce was an incredible exception as has been highlighted in articles about him when he made the HoF. He is the only 3-4 DE to make the top 20 career sack leaders. 3-4 DE's are more important as run stuffers, and get a lot of help from LB's in pass rush. They have to be big rather than fast.

This strikes me as the exact wrong time to switch to a 3-4. The trick to NFL defenses is that they are cyclical, and there are only so many good players for the various roles you have to fill for a given defense. The 3-4 has been the popular choice lately, which is making NT's and bigger DE's harder and harder to find. The thing to do now is go to whatever the new 3-4 teams are switching from - because there will be more players to run those schemes avaiable. It's a bit more complicated than that, just because you have to factor in what the colleges are doing (and therefore what players are available in what numbers from the draft), but the bottom line is, you never want to be one of the last to switch to the latest fad. Switch early to the NEXT fad. Kind of like buying a house at the height of the boom - bad move. I also really wish people would stop confusing 4-3 with Tampa-2. Not all 4-3's are Tampa-2's. Gregg Wlliams runs a 4-3 in New Orleans now, Redskins before, always has, and the Titans still run essentially the same D. Does it look a thing like the Bills or Colts to you? That D is more like the old Bears 46 which was large and ferocius. Lots of attacking. We're probably a lot closer in players to go to an old-school 4-3 than to try to find a NT and bigger ends for a 3-4. If we did go 3-4, Schobel and Maybin would both need to play OLB. You'd have probably Kelsay, Stroud, Williams on the line, and Kelsay would need to bulk up. Bruce Smith could do it at 265 or so, but he was a superhuman athlete. Now if we draft that big fast 290lb DE in the first round - his name escapes me - I suppose we'd be off to a good start for DL.

And how about Gailey's record as a consistent WINNER and his successful offensive football everywhere he's coached in the NFL? Does that have no impact?

Yeah because taking over a 6-10 team and going 10-6 and 8-8 in two years, is just "OK". They went 5-11 after he was fired. These talking heads on TV are not paid to be right. They are paid to entertain the masses, and since most of the masses don't live in WNY, they can entertain by being wise-cracking idiots mocking the small market. There's no way to know how good the Bills will be, but I have seen nothing in Gailey's record that can be mocked intelligently.

What a porrly researched and edited article - and the fans here who don't want to hear anything positive are eating it up, of course. As a side-note - WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP CALLING NIX A OBD INSIDER??? He was with the Bills one whole year folks. He was brought in as an outsider last year, and in that one year the Bills had seemingly one of their best drafts ever. Before that he worked in San Diego. How were their personnel moves bad? AS FOR THE NEW HC Now we have Gailey coming in as an experienced and well-regarded offensive mind (who likes to pound it on the ground) and head coach in both the NFL and College who (unlike Jauron) has repeatedly put up winning records. And we know from published stories (sorry I don't have the links, but this stuff is all over): Scott Pioli wanted him as the HC in Kansas City, but for strictly marketing reasons didn't pick him. He was then fired by the new kid who wanted to rely on Matt Cassell throwing the ball rather than Larry Johnson running it. How's that working out KC? Oh right - their new kid coach gets the 5th pick overall with their 4-12 record. We know Bill Cowher told Pittsburgh Gailey was his choice to replace him. Nearly everyone here wanted Cowher, but noone here is willing to take Cowher's word on what a good coach Gailey is?? Huh??? We know Jerry Jones says firing Chan Gailey as Dallas head coach after just two years was his worst decision as Dallas owner. Dallas dropped from 8-8 to 5-11 after he was fired. But because some of you want to hate - what? - your city, your team, yourselves?? You've decided to hate this move too. Whatever. We'll know for sure in a couple of years. Until then, just don't do anything too silly that makes it harder to bring in FA's OK?

I really am not taking Cowher's hesitance personally. He and his wife are both from North Carolina. His daughter is playing college basketball in South Carolina. He has all the money he needs doing TV, and there's good reason to believe Fox will be out with the Panthers within 12 months. Why the heck would he do anything but wait for that situation, and even if the Panthers job doesn't free up, why wouldn't he just wait a few more years for his daughter to finish? None of that has anything to do with Ralph Wilson, the fans, the city of Buffalo, the weather, the QB (Jake Delhomme hardly represents a "settled QB situation"). Sometimes the real answer isn't sinister, it's just simple. He's happy where he is.

I think you're reading too much into Schefter's tweet. He's not implying anything deceitful about the Bills' attempt to get Shanahan. He's saying they are trying. I actually think the reason Wilson fired Jauron when he did was just so he'd have the jump on getting one of the big guys. I'm down near D.C., and all I can say is you gotta love the reports that Shanahan prefers the situation in Buffalo to the Redskins. If there's any truth to that Danny Snyder must be losing it - I know it's killing the fans!

Yeah - that really was the perfect illustration today. They could have lost today in some ways that would have disguised DJ's failure, so I'm glad if they had to lose, they made it obvious.

A legitimate reason he might not fire him is because he doesn't have an appropriate replacement ready. A month ago, we'd have said Bobby April, but his unit has been a big part of the failures this year. It may not be all his fault, but the message that would go with promoting him would be a bit off.

Actually - to Jauron's credit, he won't resign, unless maybe if he's asked to, because he's too honorable for that. Quitting on his team is less character than he has. DJ's a good man - he's just wrong-headed as a coach. He thinks it's too hard, and doesn't hold his players accountable as a result. He expects to lose, and unintentionally he teaches that to his players - but it's unintentional - I'm sure he still feels he's doing all that can be done to teach them the right way, and on that basis he wouldn't want to let them down.

AMEN

Again - the opposing quarterback went 2/16 and you think they lost because of QB play. There's so little logic there I don't know what to say other than you need to see the bigger picture. How about this - do you remember Edwards rookie year? Do you remember what he was good at? Quick decisions, quick release, accurate throws, right? Do you think he got tentative on his own?? Or do you think maybe the coach that can't get a punt return team out on the field without a timeout might be part of the problem? You know - the coach who calls for a punt down by 7 in the 4th against New Orleans? Was that Edwards fault too? He's learned to expect failure, just like the rest of the team because Jauron teaches failure. "It's hard to win in the NFL."

NINE false starts at home. Hideous field position because our punt returner playes like a scared little girl - and who does that remind you of (hint - his initials are DJ)? On the fumble, Rocoe was moving away from the contact. Trent was taking hits, trying to make plays, picking up first downs on drives that started on the 1-yard line. He's far from perfect, but he's also far from the problem.

"[Trent Edwards statement] demonstrates zero accountability." BECAUSE HIS COACH DEMANDS ZERO ACCOUNTABILITY. Trent can be an excellent QB. He is coached by a man who tolerates failure because "it's hard to win in the NFL". FOLKS, WE JUST LOST TO A QB WHO WENT TWO FOR F-ING 16!!!! WAKE UP - IT'S NOT OUR QB THAT'S THE PROBLEM!!!! 9 false starts by a home football team only happens with pathetic coaching. Jauron is a failure because he tolerates failure, and has come to expect failure. He has coached that mindset into the team and the result shows.

NO - he wants to be released. Trade the stiff or bench him, but don't release him yet.

Agreed. Today's loss was all about an undisciplined unispired team. How many false starts was that?? AT HOME???? Today was the perfect expression of lack of accountability. If Jauron isn't held accountable, there's no reason for the player's to be, since he tolerates their mental errors. For those morons who still think the problem is Trent Edwards - wake up - the opposing quarterback was 2 for 16 and won. Trent wasn't perfect, but he made a lot of plays. Too bad so many were from awful down and distance and awful field position. The biggest problem with firing Jauron now is that April was the logical interim replacement, and his unit was the among worst out there.

That was superb!

The offense did poorly against the Saints, because the O-line had their worst game so far. Wood, in particular, was having an awful afternoon - beaten repeatedly, interspersed with bad penalties. Since Wood has shown us plenty to be excited about already, and has played a total of 3 real games, I'm inclined to shrug my shoulders, say "our line is ridiculously young, and will have some bad days against top pass rushes", and look forward to watching the improvement next week. We are also down a couple of pegs at RT, if you hadn't noticed. Meanwhile, Hangartner was having an outrageously bad time snapping the ball. At least 5 I saw Trent had to scoop up off the turf, which doesn't help him get into his stance and start his reads which he has to do quickly because of the rush. The same rush, no doubt, which Hangartner's struggles to handle were causing him to mess up his snaps. But sure - that's a good reason to jettison yet another promising QB - in this case, one that the countless national analysts, including great former QB's, are extremely impressed by.

No, actually, the Bills ran the screen quite a bit Sunday - the Saints were looking for it, and stopped it cold. Then, because he isn't a complete idiot, AVP stopped trying it so much.

Although I am a math expert of sorts - that's not really necessary and your logic is spot-on. The goal is to win the game. The chances of getting the TD, or a first-down, both of which lock up the game - were extremely high, and the chance of losing anything meaningful (trading yards for 3 points) was minimal. For those who are afraid of a fumble or INT being taken back - fine - don't run the play to the outside. The odds of losing a fumble off a dive play and having it returned any distance are ridiculously small.