Gailey In Full Panic Mode?

[PS 56]

I don't see it as panic mode. I feel he did the right thing right now. He seen the OTA's and watched the preseason, and even those who were on the sideline said Trent looked better. Trent just chokes when it counts. That's the bottom line I believe. I have been bashed for saying how bad Trent looked, but it showed. Trent can be a great guy, but it doesn't matter if he's not getting it done. I don't think things will improve either, but it shows the coach is not scared to pull a trigger and that message needed to get sent, and sent fast. Someone put a post on here saying Trent may have a disorder, and it might very well be true, we will never know. I hope Chan takes this to the top. We also have to get our o-line in order as well. I believe that unit starts at center and needs to work it's way out! I also feel Chan gave his team the benefeit of doubt that they were poorly coached. Now maybe he knows it was both, bad coaching and bad players. This is why they call it rebuilding.

 

Well said. I don't think trent was ever the same after the Arizona game in 08. He may do well at practice but he makes panic decisions on the field. I just don't think he sees his deep receivers.

[Philly McButterpants]

This

 

No idea what you're trying to say, but I love the avatar . . .

[yungmack]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. My point is that MOST Bills fans thought Edwards was beyond salvation. However, Chan Gailey, who was reputed to be a magician with, to be kind, less than stellar QBs, apparently thought otherwise. I don't know how he arrived at that assessment but I presume he watched all the film on Edwards, talked to everyone he could who's worked with him, talked with his coaching staff, etc. If he did all that, then paid attention to Edwards in OTAs and training camp, and still made him the starter, and if Gailey is the great QB guru he's supposed to be, how else can I take yanking Edwards after two games other than that Gailey really, really screwed up?

 

So now, after months and months of studying his QBs and building an offense IN THEORY around Edwards' supposed strengths, two weeks into what everyone knows was bound to be a tough season, he's replacing him with a QB who, in Gailey's assessment, wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards in all those months of practice? Sounds like full panic mode to me.

 

I don't get the line of reasoning some of you use, that Gailey has to make the change, that Edwards is a wuss, that coaches make changes all the time, etc. Duh! Of course that's all true. But the Edwards of this season is the Edwards of last season. The time to replace him was last February or March. But either from arrogance or a surfeit of wishful thinking, Gailey stuck with him. By his own action (benching Edwards), Gailey has admitted he screwed up.

 

So let me ask all you critics, does screwing up on the most important position by a guy whose chief recommendation for the job is a reputation for having reasonable success with a collection of meatballs give you even a slight twinge of doubt about him?

[tbonestake]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. My point is that MOST Bills fans thought Edwards was beyond salvation. However, Chan Gailey, who was reputed to be a magician with, to be kind, less than stellar QBs, apparently thought otherwise. I don't know how he arrived at that assessment but I presume he watched all the film on Edwards, talked to everyone he could who's worked with him, talked with his coaching staff, etc. If he did all that, then paid attention to Edwards in OTAs and training camp, and still made him the starter, and if Gailey is the great QB guru he's supposed to be, how else can I take yanking Edwards after two games other than that Gailey really, really screwed up?

 

So now, after months and months of studying his QBs and building an offense IN THEORY around Edwards' supposed strengths, two weeks into what everyone knows was bound to be a tough season, he's replacing him with a QB who, in Gailey's assessment, wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards in all those months of practice? Sounds like full panic mode to me.

 

I don't get the line of reasoning some of you use, that Gailey has to make the change, that Edwards is a wuss, that coaches make changes all the time, etc. Duh! Of course that's all true. But the Edwards of this season is the Edwards of last season. The time to replace him was last February or March. But either from arrogance or a surfeit of wishful thinking, Gailey stuck with him. By his own action (benching Edwards), Gailey has admitted he screwed up.

 

So let me ask all you critics, does screwing up on the most important position by a guy whose chief recommendation for the job is a reputation for having reasonable success with a collection of meatballs give you even a slight twinge of doubt about him?

 

I know what you're saying and I think it makes him a better coach for admitting his mistakes. I feel like he had a chat with Trent and told him that this is your job to lose...and he lost it. Chan wants to win and isn't making excuses for Trent any longer. Trent is not doing his job and must be replaced.

[Ozymandius]

Why is it panic and not decisiveness or accountability?

[nonprophet]

I've been a strong supporter of Chan Gailey since he was hired. He had a history of identifying the range and limits of his QBs abilities and working with him. So I was more than willing to believe that he saw something in Trent Edwards that I surely never did, and that he'd build an offense around him that would minimize his weaknesses while playing to his strengths. Hope springs eternal.

 

Yet two weeks into the season he benches his personally chosen starter. He did this on the heels of, for example, Brett Favre throwing three picks and the "great" Eli Manning and his "powerhouse" Giants getting beaten as badly as the Bills did on Sunday (worse, without that garbage TD at the end), with the team the Bills had a solid chance of beating last week (the Dolphins) besting media darling Minnesota.

 

I'm surely not saying benching Edwards is the wrong move only that it smells of panic. And then replacing Edwards with Fitzie? If, in Gailey's assessment, he wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards (!!!) prior to yesterday, why in god's name does he think he's suddenly become the answer? And it comes on the heels of benching Spiller after ONE game.

 

I don't know about you guys, but this change causes me to question everything I thought about Gailey. And by extension, Buddy Nix's thinking.

You should be happy that the Bills have a coach who is willing to swallow his pride and reverse his past decisions in the interest of trying to win.

[The Senator]

I've been a strong supporter of Chan Gailey since he was hired. He had a history of identifying the range and limits of his QBs abilities and working with him. So I was more than willing to believe that he saw something in Trent Edwards that I surely never did, and that he'd build an offense around him that would minimize his weaknesses while playing to his strengths. Hope springs eternal.

 

Yet two weeks into the season he benches his personally chosen starter. He did this on the heels of, for example, Brett Favre throwing three picks and the "great" Eli Manning and his "powerhouse" Giants getting beaten as badly as the Bills did on Sunday (worse, without that garbage TD at the end), with the team the Bills had a solid chance of beating last week (the Dolphins) besting media darling Minnesota.

 

I'm surely not saying benching Edwards is the wrong move only that it smells of panic. And then replacing Edwards with Fitzie? If, in Gailey's assessment, he wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards (!!!) prior to yesterday, why in god's name does he think he's suddenly become the answer? And it comes on the heels of benching Spiller after ONE game.

 

I don't know about you guys, but this change causes me to question everything I thought about Gailey. And by extension, Buddy Nix's thinking.

I was optimistic about Gailey too, cautiously so, but still optimistic that maybe Buddy and Ralph got it right. That Ralph Wilson, sensing his own immortality and tired of a 10-year playoff drought - particularly a 12-game streak of gut-wrenching, rip-your-heart-out losses to the Cheatriettes* - went and hired a competent, offensive-minded head coach with an eye toward fixing our offense and our QB situation and one with at least a modicum of success working with young QBs in the past.

 

And I liked what I saw, at least initially. I sensed confidence - and cockiness, in a good way - about Gailey when he stated...

 

"I've been around enough winning programs that when I walk on the field I expect to win. I don't just hope to win."

 

I liked the end of 'Camp Marv/Camp Dick', the removal of TVs from the workout rooms, putting players in pads from the very beginning of camp, the two-a-day practice sessions, etc., and I liked the way he handled the media - he seemed honest and forthcoming. It seemed things were different this time around. But after declaring a 'wide open competition' at the QB spot, which we all looked forward to, it turned out to be anything but 'wide open'. Gailey instantly started slithering and weaseling his way out, knowing well in advance of the season that he was handing the reins back to Edwards. And thenGailey did something really stupid - he dressed down a gang of kids having a bit too much fun at Trent Edwards' expense while enjoying the final days of their summer vacation at the Bills' training camp. Nobody's gonna push this guy - or this team - around. Chan showed he was boss. Chan stuck up for Trent. Problem is that Chan had yet to build any credibility with the fans, and had no capital to cash in.

 

Now, after two blown weeks and miserable losses, it's FINALLY so painfully obvious to Gailey that Trent Edwards can't play QB in the NFL??? Makes you question whether he really does have a clue how to evaluate QB talent, and what might be sitting on our bench that Gailey's ignoring???

 

 

“I think he’s gotten better, and that’s the best way I can judge somebody,” Gailey said after practice Monday, providing his first in-depth insight on Edwards since naming him the starter two days earlier. “I’ve seen a light at the end of the tunnel. And that’s what you’re looking for.”

 

"We are just trying to get the right combination going with personnel, maybe it fits better with Ryan."

 

“He’s done a good job in practice and he’ll get his shot,” Gailey said, assessing Brohm. “He’s very smart. He knows where to go with the football. He’s got good velocity on the ball."

 

Chan Gailey - Guru

[mpl6876]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. My point is that MOST Bills fans thought Edwards was beyond salvation. However, Chan Gailey, who was reputed to be a magician with, to be kind, less than stellar QBs, apparently thought otherwise. I don't know how he arrived at that assessment but I presume he watched all the film on Edwards, talked to everyone he could who's worked with him, talked with his coaching staff, etc. If he did all that, then paid attention to Edwards in OTAs and training camp, and still made him the starter, and if Gailey is the great QB guru he's supposed to be, how else can I take yanking Edwards after two games other than that Gailey really, really screwed up?

 

So now, after months and months of studying his QBs and building an offense IN THEORY around Edwards' supposed strengths, two weeks into what everyone knows was bound to be a tough season, he's replacing him with a QB who, in Gailey's assessment, wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards in all those months of practice? Sounds like full panic mode to me.

 

I don't get the line of reasoning some of you use, that Gailey has to make the change, that Edwards is a wuss, that coaches make changes all the time, etc. Duh! Of course that's all true. But the Edwards of this season is the Edwards of last season. The time to replace him was last February or March. But either from arrogance or a surfeit of wishful thinking, Gailey stuck with him. By his own action (benching Edwards), Gailey has admitted he screwed up.

 

So let me ask all you critics, does screwing up on the most important position by a guy whose chief recommendation for the job is a reputation for having reasonable success with a collection of meatballs give you even a slight twinge of doubt about him?

 

Youngmack, I share your same concerns. That was a very well thought out post. I think it is more than fair to start questioning the decisions of this new regime.

 

Oh by the way, where are those weapons of mass destruction?

 

I was optimistic about Gailey too, cautiously so, but still optimistic that maybe Buddy and Ralph got it right. That Ralph Wilson, sensing his own immortality and tired of a 10-year playoff drought - particularly a 12-game streak of gut-wrenching, rip-your-heart-out losses to the Cheatriettes* - went and hired a competent, offensive-minded head coach with an eye toward fixing our offense and our QB situation and one with at least a modicum of success working with young QBs in the past.

 

And I liked what I saw, at least initially. I sensed confidence - and cockiness, in a good way - about Gailey when he stated...

 

"I've been around enough winning programs that when I walk on the field I expect to win. I don't just hope to win."

 

I liked the end of 'Camp Marv/Camp Dick', the removal of TVs from the workout rooms, putting players in pads from the very beginning of camp, the two-a-day practice sessions, etc., and I liked the way he handled the media - he seemed honest and forthcoming. It seemed things were different this time around. But after declaring a 'wide open competition' at the QB spot, which we all looked forward to, it turned out to be anything but 'wide open'. Gailey instantly started slithering and weaseling his way out, knowing well in advance of the season that he was handing the reins back to Edwards. And thenGailey did something really stupid - he dressed down a gang of kids having a bit too much fun at Trent Edwards' expense while enjoying the final days of their summer vacation at the Bills' training camp. Nobody's gonna push this guy - or this team - around. Chan showed he was boss. Chan stuck up for Trent. Problem is that Chan had yet to build any credibility with the fans, and had no capital to cash in.

 

Now, after two blown weeks and miserable losses, it's FINALLY so painfully obvious to Gailey that Trent Edwards can't play QB in the NFL??? Makes you question whether he really does have a clue how to evaluate QB talent, and what might be sitting on our bench that Gailey's ignoring???

 

 

“I think he’s gotten better, and that’s the best way I can judge somebody,” Gailey said after practice Monday, providing his first in-depth insight on Edwards since naming him the starter two days earlier. “I’ve seen a light at the end of the tunnel. And that’s what you’re looking for.”

 

"We are just trying to get the right combination going with personnel, maybe it fits better with Ryan."

 

“He’s done a good job in practice and he’ll get his shot,” Gailey said, assessing Brohm. “He’s very smart. He knows where to go with the football. He’s got good velocity on the ball."

 

Chan Gailey - Guru

 

 

I enjoyed reading your post. Well said.

[The Big Cat]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. My point is that MOST Bills fans thought Edwards was beyond salvation. However, Chan Gailey, who was reputed to be a magician with, to be kind, less than stellar QBs, apparently thought otherwise. I don't know how he arrived at that assessment but I presume he watched all the film on Edwards, talked to everyone he could who's worked with him, talked with his coaching staff, etc. If he did all that, then paid attention to Edwards in OTAs and training camp, and still made him the starter, and if Gailey is the great QB guru he's supposed to be, how else can I take yanking Edwards after two games other than that Gailey really, really screwed up?

 

So now, after months and months of studying his QBs and building an offense IN THEORY around Edwards' supposed strengths, two weeks into what everyone knows was bound to be a tough season, he's replacing him with a QB who, in Gailey's assessment, wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards in all those months of practice? Sounds like full panic mode to me.

 

I don't get the line of reasoning some of you use, that Gailey has to make the change, that Edwards is a wuss, that coaches make changes all the time, etc. Duh! Of course that's all true. But the Edwards of this season is the Edwards of last season. The time to replace him was last February or March. But either from arrogance or a surfeit of wishful thinking, Gailey stuck with him. By his own action (benching Edwards), Gailey has admitted he screwed up.

 

So let me ask all you critics, does screwing up on the most important position by a guy whose chief recommendation for the job is a reputation for having reasonable success with a collection of meatballs give you even a slight twinge of doubt about him?

 

Then doesn't it beg the question: if Cordell Stewart, if Tyler Thigpent, why not Trent?

 

Answer: He got one look at Trent in the preseason, running his plays, in his offense, with his players. And that was against Washington. That was the only 3-4 defense Trent saw. By comparison, even in preseason, Trent had much more success against the three teams we faced who run a 4-3 base. Stats here.

 

So, he comes out of preseason with just the one 3-4 glitch behind him. Gailey's got a couple weeks now to work him through it, and get him ready for Miami and Green Bay, two teams that run a 3-4.

 

Trent fails.

 

Unlike most quarterbacks who have played under Gailey, Trent fails. Twice.

 

Granted, both games were against tremendously good defenses, but Trent's inability or his unwillingness to attack a 3-4 defense is baffling! Those garbage time fourth down plays were stupefying!

 

Trent's done. Like (*)Dr.Dank said, Chan's going through the scrap heap now. If Trent ever was The Starter, if he was ever Gailey's guy--as you've alluded--Chan wouldn't have repeatedly said to the media, "the competition is open." You think he'd say the same for Drew Brees? Heck no.

 

It didn't work, it's the last year of his rookie contract, NEXT!

 

 

I was optimistic about Gailey too, cautiously so, but still optimistic that maybe Buddy and Ralph got it right. That Ralph Wilson, sensing his own immortality and tired of a 10-year playoff drought - particularly a 12-game streak of gut-wrenching, rip-your-heart-out losses to the Cheatriettes* - went and hired a competent, offensive-minded head coach with an eye toward fixing our offense and our QB situation and one with at least a modicum of success working with young QBs in the past.

 

And I liked what I saw, at least initially. I sensed confidence - and cockiness, in a good way - about Gailey when he stated...

 

"I've been around enough winning programs that when I walk on the field I expect to win. I don't just hope to win."

 

I liked the end of 'Camp Marv/Camp Dick', the removal of TVs from the workout rooms, putting players in pads from the very beginning of camp, the two-a-day practice sessions, etc., and I liked the way he handled the media - he seemed honest and forthcoming. It seemed things were different this time around. But after declaring a 'wide open competition' at the QB spot, which we all looked forward to, it turned out to be anything but 'wide open'. Gailey instantly started slithering and weaseling his way out, knowing well in advance of the season that he was handing the reins back to Edwards. And thenGailey did something really stupid - he dressed down a gang of kids having a bit too much fun at Trent Edwards' expense while enjoying the final days of their summer vacation at the Bills' training camp. Nobody's gonna push this guy - or this team - around. Chan showed he was boss. Chan stuck up for Trent. Problem is that Chan had yet to build any credibility with the fans, and had no capital to cash in.

 

Now, after two blown weeks and miserable losses, it's FINALLY so painfully obvious to Gailey that Trent Edwards can't play QB in the NFL??? Makes you question whether he really does have a clue how to evaluate QB talent, and what might be sitting on our bench that Gailey's ignoring???

 

 

“I think he’s gotten better, and that’s the best way I can judge somebody,” Gailey said after practice Monday, providing his first in-depth insight on Edwards since naming him the starter two days earlier. “I’ve seen a light at the end of the tunnel. And that’s what you’re looking for.”

 

"We are just trying to get the right combination going with personnel, maybe it fits better with Ryan."

 

“He’s done a good job in practice and he’ll get his shot,” Gailey said, assessing Brohm. “He’s very smart. He knows where to go with the football. He’s got good velocity on the ball."

 

Chan Gailey - Guru

 

What fascinates me most about getting to see Fitz play:

 

In this profile piece written about Gailey over the summer, it talks about his preference for mobile quarterbacks. As we all know, Fitzy loves to take off and run. I'm curious to see how Fitz handles the offense at a different, and shiftier pace.

 

 

(*)SDS, if you're out there: it would have been nice to type @Dr.Dankenstein, had his name appear as a link to his profile, and had him pinged at the mention. That way he doesn't miss the shout out, and is encouraged to come back and rejoin the conversation.

Edited September 21, 2010 by The Big Cat

[Original Byrd Man]

I've been a strong supporter of Chan Gailey since he was hired. He had a history of identifying the range and limits of his QBs abilities and working with him. So I was more than willing to believe that he saw something in Trent Edwards that I surely never did, and that he'd build an offense around him that would minimize his weaknesses while playing to his strengths. Hope springs eternal.

 

Yet two weeks into the season he benches his personally chosen starter. He did this on the heels of, for example, Brett Favre throwing three picks and the "great" Eli Manning and his "powerhouse" Giants getting beaten as badly as the Bills did on Sunday (worse, without that garbage TD at the end), with the team the Bills had a solid chance of beating last week (the Dolphins) besting media darling Minnesota.

 

I'm surely not saying benching Edwards is the wrong move only that it smells of panic. And then replacing Edwards with Fitzie? If, in Gailey's assessment, he wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards (!!!) prior to yesterday, why in god's name does he think he's suddenly become the answer? And it comes on the heels of benching Spiller after ONE game.

 

I don't know about you guys, but this change causes me to question everything I thought about Gailey. And by extension, Buddy Nix's thinking.

Totally disagree on panic mode. He misjudged Trent and realized his error. Should he have stuck with him for the season? or half way? Running out of bounds to end the game is acceptable only if you have the lead, and there have been many more errors in the last two games by Trent. Actually I give Gailey an A+ for realizing his mistake and admitting to it this early. He could have waited for Trent to go down and justify it that way.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I've been a strong supporter of Chan Gailey since he was hired. He had a history of identifying the range and limits of his QBs abilities and working with him. So I was more than willing to believe that he saw something in Trent Edwards that I surely never did, and that he'd build an offense around him that would minimize his weaknesses while playing to his strengths. Hope springs eternal.

 

Yet two weeks into the season he benches his personally chosen starter. He did this on the heels of, for example, Brett Favre throwing three picks and the "great" Eli Manning and his "powerhouse" Giants getting beaten as badly as the Bills did on Sunday (worse, without that garbage TD at the end), with the team the Bills had a solid chance of beating last week (the Dolphins) besting media darling Minnesota.

 

I'm surely not saying benching Edwards is the wrong move only that it smells of panic. And then replacing Edwards with Fitzie? If, in Gailey's assessment, he wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards (!!!) prior to yesterday, why in god's name does he think he's suddenly become the answer? And it comes on the heels of benching Spiller after ONE game.

 

I don't know about you guys, but this change causes me to question everything I thought about Gailey. And by extension, Buddy Nix's thinking.

 

I see it differently. I think Edwards showed the best physical skill set and sufficient game management during preseason that Gailey felt he could coach him up and gave him the benefit of the doubt that his poor game-day performance last year was the result of poor coaching or schemes. I think after the first game, Gailey and the coaches sat down with Edwards and watched film and marked out what had to change. 2nd game, Gailey went off and watched film and saw no improvement or even regression, and said "OK, the poor game management/decisions don't make up for the better physical skill set, NEXT!" I think Edwards is completely bemused by the 3-4 defense and, if he has any duties on calling the OL protections, may even be contributing to confusion on the line.

 

I don't think it smells of panic. I think it is calculated and was one of the options planned in from the start.

 

Just my opinion and worth whatever you like.

[The Dean]

I've been a strong supporter of Chan Gailey since he was hired. He had a history of identifying the range and limits of his QBs abilities and working with him. So I was more than willing to believe that he saw something in Trent Edwards that I surely never did, and that he'd build an offense around him that would minimize his weaknesses while playing to his strengths. Hope springs eternal.

 

Yet two weeks into the season he benches his personally chosen starter.

 

 

 

By saying "personally chosen starter" you make it sound as though Trent was Chan's dream come true at QB. That's preposterous. With the time/tape and actually face to face experience he had with the QBs, Chan gave Trent the nod to start the season It isn't like he was "The Chosen One".

 

I like the fact that Chan isn't married to any one player, and is willing to make changes, even dramatic changes, to turn things around. This is a GOOD thing, but a bad one.

[The Big Cat]

Not sure if this has been mentioned or not, but what I don't understand is, why haven't Nix and Gailey been more vocal about the rebuilding process? Why don't they just come out and say, hey listen, we need to start from scratch, the season is going to have its share of ups and downs as a result, we can't promise winning a lot of games, but we can promise to play hard, to continually improve and to move the organization forward in a way that will make us a force to be reckoned with in the not too distant future.

 

This would have made the lineup changes much easier to swallow IMO and it would have made them look better. I know, I know, some will argue that fans won't pay to see the team if the organization publicly admits they aren't very good. But, honestly, is anyone going to spend money on the Bills this year and not know how bad the product is? In other words, aren't the consumers (fans) already well aware of how bad the team is? Nothing is going to change that. And it would make Gailey's decisions seem far less reactionary.

 

Not to bring politics into it, but its kind of like our current President taking blame for our country's budgetary problems even though it took a prior 8 years of mismanagement to get us into massive debt.

 

Gailey and Nix were handed a huge **** sandwich. And while they don't want to offend our incompetent owner, they might as well say publicly what everyone knows.

 

Because what message does that send to the players? To guys like Lee Evans and Brian Moorman and Rian Lindell?

[Pilsner]

Chan's not hitting the panic button. He knew Trent wasn't great from past performance. Chan has made the most of mediocre qb talent and the only way he could evaluate if Trent was fixable was through regular season games when the real bullets were flying. This is where Trent has failed in the past. Trent failed again and the experiment is over. Now Chan is moving on. Just glad he didn't wait longer than 2 games to do so.

 

I think if anyone is panicking it's some of the fans here.

[LABills08]

Not sure if this has been mentioned or not, but what I don't understand is, why haven't Nix and Gailey been more vocal about the rebuilding process? Why don't they just come out and say, hey listen, we need to start from scratch, the season is going to have its share of ups and downs as a result, we can't promise winning a lot of games, but we can promise to play hard, to continually improve and to move the organization forward in a way that will make us a force to be reckoned with in the not too distant future.

 

This would have made the lineup changes much easier to swallow IMO and it would have made them look better. I know, I know, some will argue that fans won't pay to see the team if the organization publicly admits they aren't very good. But, honestly, is anyone going to spend money on the Bills this year and not know how bad the product is? In other words, aren't the consumers (fans) already well aware of how bad the team is? Nothing is going to change that. And it would make Gailey's decisions seem far less reactionary.

 

Not to bring politics into it, but its kind of like our current President taking blame for our country's budgetary problems even though it took a prior 8 years of mismanagement to get us into massive debt.

 

Gailey and Nix were handed a huge **** sandwich. And while they don't want to offend our incompetent owner, they might as well say publicly what everyone knows.

 

 

And real quick, to tie this back into the Edwards debate, why don't Nix and Gailey just say: "Well listen, we had 3 QBs on the roster when we took over. All 3 are good players, but they each have a lot of work to do in their own respective areas (the polite way of saying, all 3 equally suck, but in different ways). Trent had a great training camp (true), is well respected by his teammates (true enough for him to be voted captain), and is the most experienced starter we have (true). It will be his job unless we see a reason to give one of the other guys a shot. No one's starting position on this team is safe, its not just the QBs (okay maybe they have said this).

 

I mean, I understand also, you don't want to publicly say that your team isn't good bc of how it will play in the locker room. No player wants his coach to publicly talk about how much they suck. But, the players aren't dumb. They have to be aware of how bad the team is. And so long as the front office doesn't talk about the rebuilding effort in the context of how bad the talent is, I can't see how it will offend the players too much.

[Cookiemonster]

It is simply the right decision here. Trent had a chance. He has the tools, he edged out Fitz in camp, but all along Chan said that was the order they were in at that point, and it could change, and never "Trent is our guy, he is our starting QB, chips fall where they may". Trent was the slightly better performer out of three so-so QBs in camp, and Chan chose the best option at that time. The hope being that Trent could continue to put it together and perform once the season started.

 

Trent fell flat on his face, not just with overall results, but with decisions and actions on individual plays. Chan doesn't need to give him six weeks to realize that it isn't working, and a fourth year QB who barely won the competition has a short leash. I'm happy for the spark and change because the first two weeks were pretty embarassing.

 

I am disappointed that it isn't Brohm who at least has the mystery potential to be a good NFL QB that we could hope for, while I think we know Fitz's upside limits. Brohm will get his chance, and hopefully he takes better advantage of it than Trent did his. But for now, go Fitz!

 

I also do wonder if it might have been a better bet to try to hide things and have the surprise advantage against the Pats, but probably in this age of Twitter it would have been too hard and made it more difficult for the two QBs during practice.

 

Nice job, very well thought out and written.

[LABills08]

Because what message does that send to the players? To guys like Lee Evans and Brian Moorman and Rian Lindell?

 

I just hit on that w/o seeing your response. Realized I missed covering that point.

 

I guess the way I see it is, who cares? You can the guys that their leadership is going to be important in getting the Bills back to glory. All 3 of them will still be able to play in the next 3 years. And its not like they need Chan or Nix to tell them how bad the team is. They already know. The only thing that changes is that the Bills publicly acknowledge they are rebuilding the team. They have only made subtle hints to it so far.

 

What's there to lose?

[bobblehead]

Youngmack, I share your same concerns. That was a very well thought out post. I think it is more than fair to start questioning the decisions of this new regime.

 

Oh by the way, where are those weapons of mass destruction?

 

 

 

 

I enjoyed reading your post. Well said.

 

 

 

Three interesting posts here. Panic, unity in panic, and the relief found in the shared unity in panic. I would have to agree with whomever it was that said the fans are experiencing more panic than the team or the coach.

[The Big Cat]

What's there to lose?

 

Players.

 

Players like Kyle Williams. Come FA, and Kyle thinks back about busting his tail to help his team win, only to have his coach tell him, yeah, don't even bother.

 

--OR---

 

Nix and Gailey can say what they say and continue to work hard and try to win, that's the honorable thing.

 

Now, behind the scenes they might be wringing their hands and banging their heads against the wall, but so long as they prefer backroom frustration to locker room mutiny, they're going to keep touting their players publicly, and telling guys like Kyle Williams, in private, that his services are gravely needed, and that he should keep up the good work.

Edited September 21, 2010 by The Big Cat

[4BillsintheBurgh]

I just hit on that w/o seeing your response. Realized I missed covering that point.

 

I guess the way I see it is, who cares? You can the guys that their leadership is going to be important in getting the Bills back to glory. All 3 of them will still be able to play in the next 3 years. And its not like they need Chan or Nix to tell them how bad the team is. They already know. The only thing that changes is that the Bills publicly acknowledge they are rebuilding the team. They have only made subtle hints to it so far.

 

What's there to lose?

The locker room.

The goal is to win. If your front office and coaching staff does not publically put winning first, what will the players do? Just not bother? What does that say to free agents who may come here? "well, we're gonna really try to win...", come on down so you can be part of our stroll to victory!

Whether it's true or not, the front office has to believe their path is the correct one, if not they're not worth a crap in the first place. Would you rather have Jauron telling you it's hard to win in the NFL? Sounds to me like that's what you're looking for.