aristocrat Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 weis coming here would be a nice deal...the guy won 3 rings as the oc for the pats...on the giants staff that beat us in 90. this guy has an nfl brain and took a job at ND where i dont think anyone can succeed at. cowher would be my first choice but weis would be my second. our offense would become instantly credible and our defense would have a lot less pressure on them and we have a winning team
Mr. WEO Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 You don't suppose a lot of those rushes came in garbage time, do you? Please note: For The Rams offense those years, garbage time began midway through the second. You're joking, right?
DarthICE Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 weis coming here would be a nice deal...the guy won 3 rings as the oc for the pats...on the giants staff that beat us in 90. this guy has an nfl brain and took a job at ND where i dont think anyone can succeed at. cowher would be my first choice but weis would be my second. our offense would become instantly credible and our defense would have a lot less pressure on them and we have a winning team Wouldnt it be nice if Bellacheat had to actually game plan for us?
The Big Cat Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 You're joking, right? I was exaggerating about the garbage time starting in quarter 2, but, other than that, I think it's worthy of consideration. Plus, in their case, a good pass-attack is a good run-attack. I mean Jesus, how do you defend against that? Oh yes, STEAL THEIR CALLS! Anything pulled from those years should be considered a statistical anomaly, IMHO.
Mike in Syracuse Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Weis has rings and I've heard of him. He's perfect!
Mr. WEO Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 I was exaggerating about the garbage time starting in quarter 2, but, other than that, I think it's worthy of consideration. Plus, in their case, a good pass-attack is a good run-attack. I mean Jesus, how do you defend against that? Oh yes, STEAL THEIR CALLS! Anything pulled from those years should be considered a statistical anomaly, IMHO. Because you say so? Look, you must have missed it, but they were the dominant offense of that time. They appeared in 2 SB's, won 1 and narrowly lost the other---in a 3 year span. One can perhaps bend their intellect in such a way as to consider ONE such season "a statistical anomaly", but it is simply ridiculous to say that all 3 years were so. You may also chose to hold onto the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, but your believing in them is no more based in fact than your above highlighted statement.
The Big Cat Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Because you say so? Look, you must have missed it, but they were the dominant offense of that time. They appeared in 2 SB's, won 1 and narrowly lost the other---in a 3 year span. One can perhaps bend their intellect in such a way as to consider ONE such season "a statistical anomaly", but it is simply ridiculous to say that all 3 years were so. You may also chose to hold onto the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, but your believing in them is no more based in fact than your above highlighted statement. Easy does it. Your original claim implied that Mike Martz was unjustly derided for not committing to the run. We were meant to infer that based on this information, Martz could and would build a balanced attack here in Buffalo. My point was that you can't really take the numbers from those years and arrive at any theory which in any way, shape or form, involves this current Bills squad.
CardinalScotts Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 I would like Weis as head coach he knows offense and that is what we need. In addition he knows the NFL, it takes alot of energy and a bunch of younger go getters to recruit. Reminds me a Callahan at Nebraska - no one doubts the guy knows offense despite not having success at the college level. I would take Weis but only AFTER a new GM.
PushthePile Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Because you say so? Look, you must have missed it, but they were the dominant offense of that time. They appeared in 2 SB's, won 1 and narrowly lost the other---in a 3 year span. One can perhaps bend their intellect in such a way as to consider ONE such season "a statistical anomaly", but it is simply ridiculous to say that all 3 years were so. You may also chose to hold onto the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, but your believing in them is no more based in fact than your above highlighted statement. Perhaps it had something to do with fielding 5 HOF players on offense. The Martz system was exposed painfully during his brief stops in Detroit and San Fran.
John Cocktosten Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Simply not true. Perhaps you have heard of Marshall Faulk? These are his numbers during the period when Martz "refused to run the ball": 1999*+ 26 STL RB 28 16 16 253 1381 7 58 5.5 2000*+ 27 STL RB 28 14 14 253 1359 18 36 5.4 2001*+ 28 STL RB 28 14 14 260 1382 12 71 5.3 And those were just his rushing numbers. During this period, he ranked 5th, 8th and 3rd in total yards in the respective years. He ranked 14th, 4th and 14th in total carries amonsgt ALL RBs. This same nonsense get posted over and over despite it's obvious inaccuracy. How can a team like Buffalo, with few if any willing candidates of any stature, and with a perennially awful offense, dismiss a guy like Martz out of hand? Oh, I forgot, this is a place where a lot of posters were really getting psyched about AVP when he stumbled into the OC seat. Go figure. Taking 3 years of a his career is hardly a sample set, let's see how Martz hasdone since then? In '02 Stl. ranked 30TH RUSH ATT. AND 2ND IN PASS ATT. In '03 Stl. ranked 30th IN RUSH ATT. AND 3RD IN PASS ATT. In '04 Stl ranked 25th IN RUSHES AND 5 IN PASSES In '05 Stl ranked 22nd IN RUSHES AND 4TH IN PASSES In '06 Detroit ranked DEAD LAST IN RUSHES and 7TH IN PASS ATT. In '07 Detroit ranked 31ST IN RUSHES and 9TH IN PASS ATT. In '08 SF ranked 27TH IN RUSHES and 13TH IN PASS ATT. Seems to me he doesn't run the ball very much. Go figure.......
BuffaloRebound Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Like Weis, but not sure he's got enough presence to be head coaching material. Gotta be able to motivate these guys every week. Much more to it than X's and O's.
Red Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 If Weis was OC, Im ok with that. If Clausen ends up with the Bills, Im ok with that also But if he was head coach ...who would his DC be???. Well at least he would know the Pats, can't think the offense up their has changed that must since he left... I could see how the Bills are thinking. But I think they better get the GM position filled first, not the other way around. I agree. All of this contacting coaches first stuff is @$$ backwards, IMO. Alot of GM's want to bring in their own guys and philosophies when they start. The Redskins brought in Bruce Allen first, now Shanahan is rumored to have a contract all in the works at Redskins Park. GM first, then coach. Picking the coach before the GM is going to limit whomever may be viewed as a GM for the Bills. I have never heard of a team doing it this way. Anyone else?
DE Bills Fan Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 why, is he a minority? Joe. Love that Avatar (ha-ha)
Mr. WEO Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Easy does it. Your original claim implied that Mike Martz was unjustly derided for not committing to the run. We were meant to infer that based on this information, Martz could and would build a balanced attack here in Buffalo. My point was that you can't really take the numbers from those years and arrive at any theory which in any way, shape or form, involves this current Bills squad. If that was your point, this is the first time you have stated it. You previously said that Faulk's numbers came in garbage time and that, even as such, they are a statistical anomaly. There was no reference or inference to the Bills. Nor was there in my post, which simply stated the obvious---that saying Martz didn't run the ball in St. Louis is easily proven as false. But regarding my thoughts on Martz, it does strike me as crazy that we wouldn't even give a glance to a guy who, though personally difficult, knows how to run an aggressive offense. Don't we have talent (or at least potential) at WR? The majority here seems to think that we do. Don't we have talent at RB? Ditto. Might Brohm have the potential of an Arena football grocery bagging bench warmer from Iowa? He certainly might. So why not give Martz a chance? We haven't had a legitimate OC for a decade---and many are ready to settle for....well who, exactly? How could we do worse? Perhaps it had something to do with fielding 5 HOF players on offense. The Martz system was exposed painfully during his brief stops in Detroit and San Fran. Pile, a very convincing argument could be made that Warner, Holt, Faulk will get intot the HOF becuse of that 3 year stretch. Hard to say Martz was "exposed" because he was dumped rather quickly by simply awful teams like SF and Detroit. Hard to run his system without a QB and WRs. How have those teams done since they dumped him? Taking 3 years of a his career is hardly a sample set, let's see how Martz hasdone since then?In '02 Stl. ranked 30TH RUSH ATT. AND 2ND IN PASS ATT. In '03 Stl. ranked 30th IN RUSH ATT. AND 3RD IN PASS ATT. In '04 Stl ranked 25th IN RUSHES AND 5 IN PASSES In '05 Stl ranked 22nd IN RUSHES AND 4TH IN PASSES In '06 Detroit ranked DEAD LAST IN RUSHES and 7TH IN PASS ATT. In '07 Detroit ranked 31ST IN RUSHES and 9TH IN PASS ATT. In '08 SF ranked 27TH IN RUSHES and 13TH IN PASS ATT. Seems to me he doesn't run the ball very much. Go figure....... The Rams demise followed the declining skills of Faulk---which actually reinforces how valuable he was to their offensive plan, as well as the injuries to Warner. As above, tell me how the guys who followed Martz in SF ("Frank Gore" is not an offensive scheme---and by the way, they are 31st in rushing attempts. That's worse than with Martz. Go figure.) and Detroit (who lost EVERY game after they fired MArtz) are still in the bottom 10 in rushes--and passes. AND they have lost all but 2 games in the 2 seasons since they "moved on" from Martz. You should judge him on what he did, not what he didn't do. Unless you believe we are worse than Detroit, your argument is weak.
John Cocktosten Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 The Rams demise followed the declining skills of Faulk---which actually reinforces how valuable he was to their offensive plan, as well as the injuries to Warner. As above, tell me how the guys who followed Martz in SF ("Frank Gore" is not an offensive scheme---and by the way, they are 31st in rushing attempts. That's worse than with Martz. Go figure.) and Detroit (who lost EVERY game after they fired MArtz) are still in the bottom 10 in rushes--and passes. AND they have lost all but 2 games in the 2 seasons since they "moved on" from Martz. You should judge him on what he did, not what he didn't do. Unless you believe we are worse than Detroit, your argument is weak. How does what SF and Detroit are doing this year have anything to do with what Martz did when he was there? I said that he doesn't like to run the ball, the facts are the facts. His offenses have been at the bottom in rushing attempts every year that he's been in the league. I don't really know what your rebuttal could be? And here is the difference between Martz and Weis. Weis got canned and 10 teams were on the phone the next day. Martz gets canned and he's in a studio begging for a job that no one wants.
The Big Cat Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 If that was your point, this is the first time you have stated it. You previously said that Faulk's numbers came in garbage time and that, even as such, they are a statistical anomaly. There was no reference or inference to the Bills. Nor was there in my post, which simply stated the obvious---that saying Martz didn't run the ball in St. Louis is easily proven as false. But regarding my thoughts on Martz, it does strike me as crazy that we wouldn't even give a glance to a guy who, though personally difficult, knows how to run an aggressive offense. Don't we have talent (or at least potential) at WR? The majority here seems to think that we do. Don't we have talent at RB? Ditto. Might Brohm have the potential of an Arena football grocery bagging bench warmer from Iowa? He certainly might. You're right, I jumped straight to the notion that your stats and the reason for bringing them to the argument were bull ****. I didn't bother explaining why, I just hinted at their fallacy. So okay, my bad. Meanwhile, other posters on this page have hence explained why they're suspect.
PushthePile Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Pile, a very convincing argument could be made that Warner, Holt, Faulk will get intot the HOF becuse of that 3 year stretch. Hard to say Martz was "exposed" because he was dumped rather quickly by simply awful teams like SF and Detroit. Hard to run his system without a QB and WRs. How have those teams done since they dumped him? Warner,Holt, and Faulk all showed they could play at high level without Martz. Martz has failed to show he can coach without them. The players are going to the HOF and the coach is unemployed.
Astrojanitor Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 The jobs require two different skill sets. College coaches need to be "rah rah" guys more than NFL HCs. They also have to be good at recruiting high school stars. Not on the pro job description. And they need to kiss the azz of the alumni contributors. Notre Dame is also a tough team to coach because the school actually makes the players go to class. My experience teaching at a DIV I football school involves knowing, easily, 90% of classes get ignored by the football team. ND does not consider this to be alternate universe professional football--they actually hope the kids have a future. Weis may or may not be a genius, but he probably has access to those kids half of the time a program like Oklahoma does.
spartacus Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 I agree. All of this contacting coaches first stuff is @$ backwards, IMO. Alot of GM's want to bring in their own guys and philosophies when they start. The Redskins brought in Bruce Allen first, now Shanahan is rumored to have a contract all in the works at Redskins Park. GM first, then coach. Picking the coach before the GM is going to limit whomever may be viewed as a GM for the Bills. I have never heard of a team doing it this way. Anyone else? cleveland did it this way last year. their GM is suing them, they hired Holmgren and will soon fire Mangini overall, it worked well
aristocrat Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 bills hire weis...weis trades for brady quinn...we draft left tackle with our first pick
Recommended Posts