7-9 last year to 2-14 this year?

[MClem06]

OK, I'll probably be getting all the Naysayers out of the woodwork with this question but I just don't see how the "experts" are proposing we are a 2-14 team. Let's look at the add/loss column for "impact" players/coaches...

 

Lost:

Head Coach Dick Jauron (good riddance)

Terrell Owens (didn't free up Lee so what purpose did he serve)

Josh Reed (decent/ somewhat reliable slot reciever)

Aaron Schobel (sack leader on a not so sack heavy defense)

I'm probably missing more but these were the ones that stand out.

 

Added:

Coach Gailey

Dynamic RB Spiller

NT Troup

DE/OLB Carrington

OL Cornell Green

OLB Andra Davis

WR Nelson

 

And I'm again probably missing more but these stand out. Our Offensive line though it didn't get better got healthier. The negatives are that we're in a new system on both offense and defense BUT I have no idea how it could get any worse than last year as both units excluding the secondary were completly disfunctional. And again Trent is a question mark. Even so, our team played competant enough to get 7 wins last year???

Looking at the schedule side, how can we only win 2 games with Kansas City, Chicago and Cleveland on the list? These analysts piss me straight off.

[dollars 2 donuts]

Just a note: we were 6-10 last year.

[ganesh]

I have posted this in other thread previously.

 

The opinions of these writers (and not that I agree with it) is from the fact that they feel that due to our schedule, we really have no shot at winning the 6 games against the AFC East foes (they believe that those teams got much better than the Bills in the offseason and have their QB position and LT position set, whereas the Bills do not). They also believe that we do not have a shot at beating the top three teams of the AFC North and NFC North that we play this year. That leaves us with a shot to win against KC, JAX, Cleveland, Detroit. They figure that we will go 2-2 in those games and hence a 2-14 record for the year.

 

Again these are their opinions. IF you had no allegiance to the Bills, I see how they can view our team. After all, how do you think about the Lions or Cleveland. I am sure you are thinking they are the 31st and 32nd team in the league, which every fan of those teams will beg to differ.

[Rico]

OK, I'll probably be getting all the Naysayers out of the woodwork with this question but I just don't see how the "experts" are proposing we are a 2-14 team. Let's look at the add/loss column for "impact" players/coaches...

 

Lost:

Head Coach Dick Jauron (good riddance)

Terrell Owens (didn't free up Lee so what purpose did he serve)

Josh Reed (decent/ somewhat reliable slot reciever)

Aaron Schobel (sack leader on a not so sack heavy defense)

I'm probably missing more but these were the ones that stand out.

 

Added:

Coach Gailey

Dynamic RB Spiller

NT Troup

DE/OLB Carrington

OL Cornell Green

OLB Andra Davis

WR Nelson

 

And I'm again probably missing more but these stand out. Our Offensive line though it didn't get better got healthier. The negatives are that we're in a new system on both offense and defense BUT I have no idea how it could get any worse than last year as both units excluding the secondary were completly disfunctional. And again Trent is a question mark. Even so, our team played competant enough to get 7 wins last year???

Looking at the schedule side, how can we only win 2 games with Kansas City, Chicago and Cleveland on the list? These analysts piss me straight off.

Brownies own us. That's one game that damn well better be a W.

[Dorkington]

We lost our "star" players in TO and Schobel. And all of the other teams got "better".

 

This is all that's really been looked at on paper. And it's easy to predict a horrible season based on that.

 

But last year... we had no OC heading into the season, and threw the job at a first year guy, and something like... 20 guys injured? And 8 or 9 different starting OL formations? And then losing the HC half way through the season as well.

 

Anyone who actually looks at the team last year and what they went through, can see that the team shouldn't be worse this year than the team last year. Unfortunately, how our team does, isn't fully dependent on our play, but also the play of our opponents.

 

Even if we are slightly better... if our opponents are greatly better, then our record will get significantly worse.

[DreReed83]

OK, I'll probably be getting all the Naysayers out of the woodwork with this question but I just don't see how the "experts" are proposing we are a 2-14 team. Let's look at the add/loss column for "impact" players/coaches...

 

Lost:

Head Coach Dick Jauron (good riddance)

Terrell Owens (didn't free up Lee so what purpose did he serve)

Josh Reed (decent/ somewhat reliable slot reciever)

Aaron Schobel (sack leader on a not so sack heavy defense)

I'm probably missing more but these were the ones that stand out.

 

Added:

Coach Gailey

Dynamic RB Spiller

NT Troup

DE/OLB Carrington

OL Cornell Green

OLB Andra Davis

WR Nelson

 

And I'm again probably missing more but these stand out. Our Offensive line though it didn't get better got healthier. The negatives are that we're in a new system on both offense and defense BUT I have no idea how it could get any worse than last year as both units excluding the secondary were completly disfunctional. And again Trent is a question mark. Even so, our team played competant enough to get 7 wins last year???

Looking at the schedule side, how can we only win 2 games with Kansas City, Chicago and Cleveland on the list? These analysts piss me straight off.

 

Obviously you haven't checked out our schedule. Take a look see and i see this team going 4-12 or 5-11. This team has improved from what I've seen but so has our entire division

[notwoz]

Washington Post columnist Michael Wilbon was interviewed on a Washington DC area news station this morning and said he thought the Washington NFL franchise with the racist nickname (my words not his) could win nine, or maybe 10 games this year and even contend for a playoff spot. The basis of his prediction? The team acquired Mike Shanahan and Donovan McNabb, and called them two key factors.

That got me to thinking about why the Bills are getting no respect. That's because they have last year's QB and a coach who is not as highly regarded as Shanahan. It has nothing to do with the relative level of talent, team chemistry or some quantitative measurements. It's strictly "image" and whether the team did what the "pundits" said the team should have done.

Bills didn't get Shanahan (or Cowher or some other "sexy" big-name coach) and they didn't "upgrade" the QB position. Ergo, they must suck.

Just my two cents.

[DreReed83]

OK, I'll probably be getting all the Naysayers out of the woodwork with this question but I just don't see how the "experts" are proposing we are a 2-14 team. Let's look at the add/loss column for "impact" players/coaches...

 

Lost:

Head Coach Dick Jauron (good riddance)

Terrell Owens (didn't free up Lee so what purpose did he serve)

Josh Reed (decent/ somewhat reliable slot reciever)

Aaron Schobel (sack leader on a not so sack heavy defense)

I'm probably missing more but these were the ones that stand out.

 

Added:

Coach Gailey

Dynamic RB Spiller

NT Troup

DE/OLB Carrington

OL Cornell Green

OLB Andra Davis

WR Nelson

 

And I'm again probably missing more but these stand out. Our Offensive line though it didn't get better got healthier. The negatives are that we're in a new system on both offense and defense BUT I have no idea how it could get any worse than last year as both units excluding the secondary were completly disfunctional. And again Trent is a question mark. Even so, our team played competant enough to get 7 wins last year???

Looking at the schedule side, how can we only win 2 games with Kansas City, Chicago and Cleveland on the list? These analysts piss me straight off.

 

Considering that we LOST to Cleveland last year, I don't see how you're counting them out? Sure it was an ugly win in an ugly game but a win was a win.

[PromoTheRobot]

Considering that we LOST to Cleveland last year, I don't see how you're counting them out? Sure it was an ugly win in an ugly game but a win was a win.

Compare the Jauron-coached team that lost to the Browns last season to the team we saw in pre-season under Gailey with CJ Spiller.

 

PTR

[Steely Dan]

The national media has no respect for Chan Gailey. If the Bills had gotten Shanahan or Cowher they'd be picking the Bills to make the playoffs. The local guys that are responsible for covering a limited number of teams, TG, JW and other media that are paying attention to a limited number of teams have a better perspective.

 

I feel like national sportswriters who assess every team in the NFL give a very cursory glance to most teams. Chan Gailey? Never heard of him. Oh wait, he was fired from GT and KC so he must suck. The Bills will suck because he sucks based on the very limited research I've done here.

[DreReed83]

Compare the Jauron-coached team that lost to the Browns last season to the team we saw in pre-season under Gailey with CJ Spiller.

 

PTR

 

It's preseason. I don't care about preseason. Raiders went 4-0 in preseason a couple years ago and then finished last in their division during the regular season. However, I have been impressed by our offensive improvements but I want to see that translate to reg. season. Until then, I remain skeptical.

Edited September 7, 2010 by DreReed83

[PromoTheRobot]

The national media has no respect for Chan Gailey. If the Bills had gotten Shanahan or Cowher they'd be picking the Bills to make the playoffs. The local guys that are responsible for covering a limited number of teams, TG, JW and other media that are paying attention to a limited number of teams have a better perspective.

 

I feel like national sportswriters who assess every team in the NFL give a very cursory glance to most teams. Chan Gailey? Never heard of him. Oh wait, he was fired from GT and KC so he must suck. The Bills will suck because he sucks based on the very limited research I've done here.

Also keep in mind that when national writers need input they ask the local writers. That means they are getting their input from Mr. Sunshine Jerry Sullivan of the Buffalo News. It's no wonder they think we suck.

 

PTR

[SuperKillerRobots]

I have posted this in other thread previously.

 

The opinions of these writers (and not that I agree with it) is from the fact that they feel that due to our schedule, we really have no shot at winning the 6 games against the AFC East foes (they believe that those teams got much better than the Bills in the offseason and have their QB position and LT position set, whereas the Bills do not). They also believe that we do not have a shot at beating the top three teams of the AFC North and NFC North that we play this year. That leaves us with a shot to win against KC, JAX, Cleveland, Detroit. They figure that we will go 2-2 in those games and hence a 2-14 record for the year.

 

Again these are their opinions. IF you had no allegiance to the Bills, I see how they can view our team. After all, how do you think about the Lions or Cleveland. I am sure you are thinking they are the 31st and 32nd team in the league, which every fan of those teams will beg to differ.

 

I don't know about anyone else, but the thing about these predictions that gets me is the record, not the rank in the league. I can accept that we are a bottom 4 or 6 team in the league right now and could not argue that at all. However, I don't think that we'll go 2-14. Furthermore, I don't think any team will go 0-16 this year and I'd expect the worst record in the league to be 2-14 or 3-13. The only reason people talk about teams going 0-16 or 1-15 is because it happened recently. Looking back through the history of the league, it is obvious that only wining 1 or 2 games in the year is hard to do. Miami and Detriot are definitely exceptions instead of rules.

 

But since those teams did so poorly, people think that suddenly every year a team is going to go nearly winless. In addition to the three or four games that look to be winable to even the most pessimistic observors, there ar ethe divisional games, which are generally closer than most give credit for. In division games, the best team doesn't always win. It should be a given that a team at least wins one division game, if not two.

 

I can't see them winning less than 5 or 6 games this year. I wouldn't bet that they'd win more than 7 though.

[murra]

In division games, the best team doesn't always win.

 

Care to explain the last 7 years of the Bills-Patriots* series?

[Gabe Northern]

People are very emotional about this for some reason. Calm down.

 

It's reasonable to think the Bills will suck this year because:

 

1. They did nothing to address the offensive line situation aside from sign a 34-year old castoff from Oakland who looked BRUTAL in preseason pass protection.

2. The passing game looks JV High School caliber. Teams have proven you can take away Lee Evans. What's left? Unproven WRs, a drug addict TE, and a QB who looked shell-shocked and washed up last year.

3. The Bills are switching to a 3-4 and many writers think that they lack the personnel to do so. Even if they're okay personnel wise, implementing new systems can be difficult and they could get gashed early.

4. Beyond that, the roster is relatively anonymous. Guys like Kyle Williams are pretty solid pros, but national writers don't know a thing about him.

 

4-5 wins is a reasonable forecast. 2 wins is a bit pessimistic.

 

Let's hope they exceed all of our expectations and make the playoffs. But that's probably less likely than 2-14.

[Koufax]

Obviously you haven't checked out our schedule. Take a look see and i see this team going 4-12 or 5-11. This team has improved from what I've seen but so has our entire division

 

But the point I bring up often when these types of arguments are made, is looking at our schedule in September gives you very little idea on the difficulty of these games in the changing NFL.

 

Remember that in 2008 we would have been looking at Seattle and Jacksonville at the start, two playoff teams coming off 11 and 10 win seasons, and penciled in in September as super bowl contenders and losses for us. Then of course we beat both of them and they won 4 and 5 games (each a worse performance than we have had since 2001 I might add).

 

So don't think just because our schedule looks tough based on 2009 performances that it will play out how it looks on paper or anything even close. We will face teams much stronger than we expect, and we will face teams much weaker than we expect.

 

That shouldn't stop anybody from doing their best guess and stating their expectations, but I see presented as certainty all the "we have no chance in that game" stuff which really doesn't hold any water at all as the season plays out. EVERY season in recent years, we have beaten teams that you would have penciled in as a loss before the season started (and unfortunately lost ones you would have expected us to win). It is the nature of the NFL, and why 2-14 or 8-8 right now doesn't mean much, and also why Vegas generally ends up with different lines on week 13 games than you would pencil in today.

[HARCO186]

Obviously you haven't checked out our schedule. Take a look see and i see this team going 4-12 or 5-11. This team has improved from what I've seen but so has our entire division

You have got to be joking right? Taking a look at the schedule:

1. WIN- Miami- having issues with Henne. Most in Miami want Pennington to start but the management will give Henne the start because the owner refers to him as a Marino. Jake long is hurt so Miami just picked up a LT from Dallas.

2. Loss- GB. They are just better..

3. Loss- NE. We will give them a run because they are weaker than past. They are having big issues running, and have no pass rush on defense.

4. Win- Jets. Sanchez is struggling, last year was a fluke..

5. Win- Jags. We are a better team than these guys. Jack Del Rio will get fired this year.

6. Loss- Ravens. They can go to the big dance.

7.Win- KC. Chan has a point to prove, the team will not let him down either.

8. Win- Bears. Martz can't help Cutler, he will throw many int..

9. win- Lions. We are better than them.

10. Loss- Cincy. These guys are better.

11. Win- Pitt. If we do pull this win, we will be in for a wildcard. Pitt will have issues because the team is not backing up Ben, and he will be back for this game.

12. Loss- Vikings. Say no more

13. Win- Browns. Say we aren't better than these guys..

14. Win- Miami. You got it a sweep because we have momentum going, and the fins struggle w/ Henne.

15. Win- NE. The pats have too many old guys and no new guys and it hurts them at the end. (I live in NE and get the news about them all the time).

16. Win- Jets- Buffalo pulls the upset to get a wildcard over the Steelers.

 

This is wishful thinking, but in reality, take away sweeps on the Jets and Fins and give us a split and we still can hit the wildcard. Read about the others that I put a win next to and you can see how I came up with this. Buffalo can easily make this happen, I see a 9-7 record in reality.....

[billsfreak]

You have got to be joking right? Taking a look at the schedule:

1. WIN- Miami- having issues with Henne. Most in Miami want Pennington to start but the management will give Henne the start because the owner refers to him as a Marino. Jake long is hurt so Miami just picked up a LT from Dallas.

2. Loss- GB. They are just better..

3. Loss- NE. We will give them a run because they are weaker than past. They are having big issues running, and have no pass rush on defense.

4. Win- Jets. Sanchez is struggling, last year was a fluke..

5. Win- Jags. We are a better team than these guys. Jack Del Rio will get fired this year.

6. Loss- Ravens. They can go to the big dance.

7.Win- KC. Chan has a point to prove, the team will not let him down either.

8. Win- Bears. Martz can't help Cutler, he will throw many int..

9. win- Lions. We are better than them.

10. Loss- Cincy. These guys are better.

11. Win- Pitt. If we do pull this win, we will be in for a wildcard. Pitt will have issues because the team is not backing up Ben, and he will be back for this game.

12. Loss- Vikings. Say no more

13. Win- Browns. Say we aren't better than these guys..

14. Win- Miami. You got it a sweep because we have momentum going, and the fins struggle w/ Henne.

15. Win- NE. The pats have too many old guys and no new guys and it hurts them at the end. (I live in NE and get the news about them all the time).

16. Win- Jets- Buffalo pulls the upset to get a wildcard over the Steelers.

 

This is wishful thinking, but in reality, take away sweeps on the Jets and Fins and give us a split and we still can hit the wildcard. Read about the others that I put a win next to and you can see how I came up with this. Buffalo can easily make this happen, I see a 9-7 record in reality.....

Like the other people say, I can see a 4-12 season. Your post isn't wishful thinking, you must be smoking something or are quite delusional. It far exceeds wishful thinking or optimism, it is downright ridiculous.

[thewildrabbit]

People are very emotional about this for some reason. Calm down.

 

It's reasonable to think the Bills will suck this year because:

 

1. They did nothing to address the offensive line situation aside from sign a 34-year old castoff from Oakland who looked BRUTAL in preseason pass protection.

2. The passing game looks JV High School caliber. Teams have proven you can take away Lee Evans. What's left? Unproven WRs, a drug addict TE, and a QB who looked shell-shocked and washed up last year.

3. The Bills are switching to a 3-4 and many writers think that they lack the personnel to do so. Even if they're okay personnel wise, implementing new systems can be difficult and they could get gashed early.

4. Beyond that, the roster is relatively anonymous. Guys like Kyle Williams are pretty solid pros, but national writers don't know a thing about him.

 

4-5 wins is a reasonable forecast. 2 wins is a bit pessimistic.

 

Let's hope they exceed all of our expectations and make the playoffs. But that's probably less likely than 2-14.

I was all upset at the fact the Bills didn't pursue top tackles early in this years draft and have felt very negative about the Bills this season because of that...

 

These last few preseason games Gailey has shown me that his QB's can run an effective offense without utilizing the 5-7 step drop backs that were used in Jarons/Schonerts/AVPs (Mike Martz style) offense in last few years Bills passing attack. We already know Spiller-Jackson-Lynch will be a 3 headed monster running attack that can get the job done running and receiving outta the backfield.

 

To watch Trent Edwards hit Lee Evans on a 40 yard go route up the sideline in 2.5-3 seconds tells me this offense just might be OK with the current tackles, plus you add in CJ Spiller who will keep the defense honest and stop them from playing constant nickle and dime coverages to stop the big passing play.

 

This is not the same podunk offense we are used to watching under Jauron, its not the same scheme or the same play caller. Gailey has shown these last three games that someone has finally found a way to get Roscoe Parrish the ball in space, something Bills fans have wanted to see since he was drafted. Both Lee Evans and Parrish have very good speed and can run go routes to open up the underneath for Spiller and the WR's.

 

The last three preseason games could be a glimpse of gameday this Sunday...which is what I'm hoping for. Now they just need to show everyone they can run that offense for 60 minutes.

[mattsox]

3-13. Bank on it. It's a bad team, bad regime, bad owner, bad players. It's bad top to bottom. Not that hard to justify 2-14, but I believe it to be like 2001, when Gregg Williams took over