BYGD1 Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 Ex-Patriots defensive coordinator Dean Pees may be in the mix for the same position with the Bills. Pees, 60, looked to be a shoe-in for the gig in Denver before LBs coach Don Martindale emerged as the favorite. Bills new head coach Chan Gailey also mentioned at his presser that he was open to a change to the 3-4 defense, and Pees would fit that bill here is link http://www.rotoworld.com/content/Home_NFL.aspx
Malazan Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 The article from the Boston Herald is entirely speculation. There's no source or reason beyond the Bills need a DC and he held the position before. This is the reporter circle jerk. A reporter think something up and then a bunch of others report on the *thought* the other reporter had...ESPN is really good at this as they report on what they themselves have reported. We've already seem this same postulation by posters here with a much better explanation and far superior theories on why this would / would not happen.
Stealth Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 If we're gonna play the 3-4. I'd rather get a coach who's gonna play an agressive version of that defense, and not the laid back bend but don't break 3-4 that the patriots play, from that parcells lineage. I'm still hoping for jets lb coach Bob Sutton, when it's all said and done.
zazie Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 The article from the Boston Herald is entirely speculation. There's no source or reason beyond the Bills need a DC and he held the position before. This is the reporter circle jerk. A reporter think something up and then a bunch of others report on the *thought* the other reporter had...ESPN is really good at this as they report on what they themselves have reported.We've already seem this same postulation by posters here with a much better explanation and far superior theories on why this would / would not happen. I have noticed that a couple of times, its true
BYGD1 Posted January 23, 2010 Author Posted January 23, 2010 The article from the Boston Herald is entirely speculation. There's no source or reason beyond the Bills need a DC and he held the position before. This is the reporter circle jerk. A reporter think something up and then a bunch of others report on the *thought* the other reporter had...ESPN is really good at this as they report on what they themselves have reported. We've already seem this same postulation by posters here with a much better explanation and far superior theories on why this would / would not happen. Everything on the Board is Speculation LOL
Malazan Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 Everything on the Board is Speculation LOL Yes, and there is much better speculation then this "article" from a "reporter" on this board. I thought I made that point, but it does seem that I didn't make it very clear. There's no point to this as there are no more facts then are already available on this board are much more thoroughly fleshed out.
bkc Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 If we're gonna play the 3-4. I'd rather get a coach who's gonna play an agressive version of that defense, and not the laid back bend but don't break 3-4 that the patriots play, from that parcells lineage. I'm still hoping for jets lb coach Bob Sutton, when it's all said and done. I live in jets counry, I do not have an opinion on Sutton , but every jets fan I know complained about him constantly
Stealth Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 I live in jets counry, I do not have an opinion on Sutton , but every jets fan I know complained about him constantly I live 15 minutes from East Ruthorford, NJ never once heard jets fans complain about Sutton, or anything relating to their defense.
Doc Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 Any coach could be considered "in the mix." Personally I think the delay is that the Bills are waiting for the Jets to lose or the SB to be played and looking at an assistant from the winner.
BYGD1 Posted January 23, 2010 Author Posted January 23, 2010 I think he's a little young for the job. My Logical Guess, since time is of the essence, the Bill would have hired a DC already if their 1st Pick was available that would lend one to believe their 1st target is on a Team Still Playing, SO Jets or Vikings are the best Defensive Teams Left Probably Not Frazier, possible DC and ASST Head Coach but I would doubt that, SO maybe Sutton is a Target? I know there are far better on here to offer their opinion and Mine is HIGHLY Speculative LOL
BYGD1 Posted January 23, 2010 Author Posted January 23, 2010 Any coach could be considered "in the mix." Personally I think the delay is that the Bills are waiting for the Jets to lose or the SB to be played and looking at an assistant from the winner. I agree unless they are in negotiations and there is a snag with someone else
bkc Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 I live 15 minutes from East Ruthorford, NJ never once heard jets fans complain about Sutton, or anything relating to their defense. they hated him when we ws running the show
ChasBB Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 If you read the fan comments at bottom of this link: http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/sports/r...-not-to-return/ ... it sounds like they could not wait to get rid of this guy Dan Pee. Of course, a few fans opinions is probably irrelevant anyhow, but better check this guy out thoroughly before bringing him to Buffalo.
Lofton80 Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 Do they think Belechek wasn't calling the shots on D? I think he knew it would be a down year when he traded Seymour, trade made no sense otherwise.
BuffaninATL Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 "Dan Pee's"? That is brutal... What's w/ the apostrophe?
BillsRUs Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 "Dan Pee's"? That is brutal... What's w/ the apostrophe? Sorry , but I couldn't resist. Do we really want Pee on our D?
Doc Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 Do they think Belechek wasn't calling the shots on D? I think he knew it would be a down year when he traded Seymour, trade made no sense otherwise. I have no doubt that Belichick thought the Pats' defense could win without Seymour, and that he could merely trade-for Derrick Burgess and things would be fine. Obviously that didn't work. What would be even more hilarious is if there's no 2011 season (okay, that's not SO funny) and that 1st rounder he got in trade doesn't even see the field until 2012.
Guest dog14787 Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 Sorry , but I couldn't resist. Do we really want Pee on our D? We probably should Pee on our D, with Chan "the man" Gailey/ Pee on the D, maybe we could beat the Pats.
Recommended Posts