Billsguy Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 So the Bills finish 4-12. What conclusions can be drawn from this fact? One has to determine if this represents progress or lack of progress. I think it is fair to compare their record to last year’s record. The Bills finished 6-10 in 2009 so let’s call their performance difference a minus 2 since they were two games worse than last year. I get the feeling that the fans are satisfied with Gailey and Nix as coach and GM. Since this is a results oriented business I don’t understand the high approval ratings. I feel a more interesting way to look at the Bills progress or lack of progress is to see how other teams who finished worse than Buffalo last year fared this year. In 2009 Cleveland finished with exactly the same record 5-11, but at least they crushed New England during the season (net score 0). In 2009 Oakland was 5-11, but they improved to 8-8 and won all their division games (net score +3) In 2009 Seattle was 5-11, but they improved to 7-9 and won their division (net score +2) In 2009 Kansas City was 4-12, but they improved to 10-6 and won their division (net score +6) In 2009 Washington was 4-12, but they improved to 6-10 (net score +2) In 2009 Tampa Bay was 3-13, but they improved to 10-6 and maybe deserved to make the playoffs (net score +7) In 2009 Detroit was 2-14, but they improved to 6-10 (net score +4) In 2009 St. Louis was 1-15, but they improved to 7-9 (net score +6) In 2009 Buffalo was 6-10, but their record worsened to 4-12 and they didn't beat any teams with a winning record for the season (net score -2) The nine bottom teams in the NFL last year and only the Bills had a worse record!!! How is that for progress? Among the 8 teams at the bottom last year (excl. Buffalo) the average improvement was +3.75 wins per team. So these bad teams from 2009 improved almost 4 wins per team for the 2010 season and yet Buffalo got two games worse. This record of failure is terrible and I am amazed by the fans who seem satisfied with the way the organization is run from owner on down to the players and coaches. The numbers don’t lie.
Rob's House Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 There are a few differences between the 09 team and 10 team that explain the change in attitude. One very important distinction is that 2009 was supposed to be a win now year. We got T.O. and had our dual threat with the wide-outs, TE and Lynch were supposed to be young up and coming stars who were coming into their own, and it was going to be the year we got over the hump. Going into 2010 everyone knew we were in rebuild mode. This year we watched a team, that after two weeks was billed as the worst team ever, evolve and improve with no name players stepping up and making big plays, while the Bills started taking playoff teams deep into OT losing by heartbreakingly narrow margins. As bad as the losses sucked there was no denying the teams progress. Another reason is because for the first time in almost a decade we have a legit QB who gives us a chance to win every time he steps on the field and an offense that can put points on the board and come back from a deficit. I mean really, by the end of 09 if the Bills were down 10 at the half did you think they had a chance to come back? And as far as comparing teams, we won games against some pretty sorry competition in 2009. The schedule in 2010 was much tougher and we put up a fight against some good ones. Get a pass rusher, a run stuffer, and an NFL DC to complement our new found offense and I think most fans are confident that we'll have a decent team. Add a solid RT and another good lineman for the interior and we could dominate. That's two offseasons, so put the rest of the league on notice, in 2012 Buffalo's kicking ass and taking names. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Bzee Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 So the Bills finish 4-12. What conclusions can be drawn from this fact? One has to determine if this represents progress or lack of progress. I think it is fair to compare their record to last year’s record. The Bills finished 6-10 in 2009 so let’s call their performance difference a minus 2 since they were two games worse than last year. I get the feeling that the fans are satisfied with Gailey and Nix as coach and GM. Since this is a results oriented business I don’t understand the high approval ratings. I feel a more interesting way to look at the Bills progress or lack of progress is to see how other teams who finished worse than Buffalo last year fared this year. In 2009 Cleveland finished with exactly the same record 5-11, but at least they crushed New England during the season (net score 0). In 2009 Oakland was 5-11, but they improved to 8-8 and won all their division games (net score +3) In 2009 Seattle was 5-11, but they improved to 7-9 and won their division (net score +2) In 2009 Kansas City was 4-12, but they improved to 10-6 and won their division (net score +6) In 2009 Washington was 4-12, but they improved to 6-10 (net score +2) In 2009 Tampa Bay was 3-13, but they improved to 10-6 and maybe deserved to make the playoffs (net score +7) In 2009 Detroit was 2-14, but they improved to 6-10 (net score +4) In 2009 St. Louis was 1-15, but they improved to 7-9 (net score +6) In 2009 Buffalo was 6-10, but their record worsened to 4-12 and they didn't beat any teams with a winning record for the season (net score -2) The nine bottom teams in the NFL last year and only the Bills had a worse record!!! How is that for progress? Among the 8 teams at the bottom last year (excl. Buffalo) the average improvement was +3.75 wins per team. So these bad teams from 2009 improved almost 4 wins per team for the 2010 season and yet Buffalo got two games worse. This record of failure is terrible and I am amazed by the fans who seem satisfied with the way the organization is run from owner on down to the players and coaches. The numbers don’t lie. I am surprised too, that everyone around here seems to be in love with Nix and Gailey.
8-8 Forever? Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 I am surprised too, that everyone around here seems to be in love with Nix and Gailey. The season went exactly as was predicted by most in July. Super tough schedule, new coaches, completely foreign and new schemes, total rebuild mode after letting Peters, et al go, 4 or 5 wins max. No surprises at all, really, other than we may have found a QB and definately found an offense, WRs and have the makings of a decent O Line that with a bit more new blood has some depth.
bladiebla Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 I am surprised too, that everyone around here seems to be in love with Nix and Gailey. Hearing Nix and Gailey talk explains a lot, say as it is. Huge change from mr. we really tried, we really tried Jauron. Another thing is that even though the results arent there, we've seen some refreshing football on the offensive side of the ball during a lot of games.
mattsox Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 I am surprised too, that everyone around here seems to be in love with Nix and Gailey. Yeah, 4-12. That's something to get excited about right? It's an awful football Team. Nix rather be sleeping then being on the phone signing FA talent and changing the culture around here. Gailey is a marginal coach at best. He should have never changed the D to 3-4 without getting the personnel in here to make that change and He couldn't evaluate our QB situation until Edwards got schlacked against the Packers. Yep. I'm so proud of these guys...
Mr. WEO Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 There are a few differences between the 09 team and 10 team that explain the change in attitude. One very important distinction is that 2009 was supposed to be a win now year. We got T.O. and had our dual threat with the wide-outs, TE and Lynch were supposed to be young up and coming stars who were coming into their own, and it was going to be the year we got over the hump. Going into 2010 everyone knew we were in rebuild mode. Getting TO was evidence that we were in a "win now" mode? First I'm hearing of that. It was widely regarded as a desperate ploy to sell tickets and jerseys. We were the same 6 or 7 win team we had been the previous 3 seasons. 2010--everyone felt we in rebuild mode? Not the folks here a tTSW. Most assumed (I was one) that Gailey would be able to win at least as many games as DJ. In fact, when national sports wags predicted 0-4 wins, this place went ballistic. Actually, at least 19 of 2010 starters were starters in 2009. This year we watched a team, that after two weeks was billed as the worst team ever, evolve and improve with no name players stepping up and making big plays, while the Bills started taking playoff teams deep into OT losing by heartbreakingly narrow margins. As bad as the losses sucked there was no denying the teams progress. Another reason is because for the first time in almost a decade we have a legit QB who gives us a chance to win every time he steps on the field and an offense that can put points on the board and come back from a deficit. I mean really, by the end of 09 if the Bills were down 10 at the half did you think they had a chance to come back? This offense can't put points on the board. They had two big games scoring and that was it. They scored one more point per game than last season. In the last 6 games, the offense scored a total of 5 TDs. They scored none in the last 2 weeks. They averaged 7 points per game over their last 6 games. You might want to add "new OC" to your wish list. And as far as comparing teams, we won games against some pretty sorry competition in 2009. The schedule in 2010 was much tougher and we put up a fight against some good ones. Get a pass rusher, a run stuffer, and an NFL DC to complement our new found offense and I think most fans are confident that we'll have a decent team. Add a solid RT and another good lineman for the interior and we could dominate. That's two offseasons, so put the rest of the league on notice, in 2012 Buffalo's kicking ass and taking names. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. We won against the same sorry competition this year. This year's schedule turned out to be not so tough. We only faced 5 teams with winning records. essentially, the "attitude" may have changed this year, but you cannot argue that the results have.
outsidethebox Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 Getting TO was evidence that we were in a "win now" mode? First I'm hearing of that. It was widely regarded as a desperate ploy to sell tickets and jerseys. We were the same 6 or 7 win team we had been the previous 3 seasons. 2010--everyone felt we in rebuild mode? Not the folks here a tTSW. Most assumed (I was one) that Gailey would be able to win at least as many games as DJ. In fact, when national sports wags predicted 0-4 wins, this place went ballistic. Actually, at least 19 of 2010 starters were starters in 2009. This offense can't put points on the board. They had two big games scoring and that was it. They scored one more point per game than last season. In the last 6 games, the offense scored a total of 5 TDs. They scored none in the last 2 weeks. They averaged 7 points per game over their last 6 games. You might want to add "new OC" to your wish list. We won against the same sorry competition this year. This year's schedule turned out to be not so tough. We only faced 5 teams with winning records. essentially, the "attitude" may have changed this year, but you cannot argue that the results have. Good post. Get ready to be slammed by the kool aid drinkers. This coaching staff and front office are mediocre at best. Comparing Gailey to Jauron and saying Gailey is a good coach because he is better than Jauron is a weak argument. This team peaked around the 10th or 11th game of the season and went downhill fast after that. They are a LONG way from being a contender. Oh well life goes on.
RealityCheck Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 Good post. Get ready to be slammed by the kool aid drinkers. This coaching staff and front office are mediocre at best. Comparing Gailey to Jauron and saying Gailey is a good coach because he is better than Jauron is a weak argument. This team peaked around the 10th or 11th game of the season and went downhill fast after that. They are a LONG way from being a contender. Oh well life goes on. Master of the obvious.
ABCmom Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 Mr Weo. I think you are mistaken. By my count the Bills have played 9 games against, not only teams with winning records, but teams that have made the playoffs: Chicago, Green Bay, *New England x2, Jets x2, Pittsburg, Baltimore and KC.
Mr. WEO Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 (edited) Mr Weo. I think you are mistaken. By my count the Bills have played 9 games against, not only teams with winning records, but teams that have made the playoffs: Chicago, Green Bay, *New England x2, Jets x2, Pittsburg, Baltimore and KC. You're right about that. They played 6 teams with winning records last year (8 games). Edited January 3, 2011 by Mr. WEO
Green Lightning Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 Yeah, 4-12. That's something to get excited about right? It's an awful football Team. Nix rather be sleeping then being on the phone signing FA talent and changing the culture around here. Gailey is a marginal coach at best. He should have never changed the D to 3-4 without getting the personnel in here to make that change and He couldn't evaluate our QB situation until Edwards got schlacked against the Packers. Yep. I'm so proud of these guys... They took over a team with next to nothing for talent. This team has drafted terribly for ten years, has no playmakers and no identity. They made headway this seasona and it's ridiculous to think they would turn it around in a year. So grow up and gut it out.
Mr. WEO Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 They took over a team with next to nothing for talent. This team has drafted terribly for ten years, has no playmakers and no identity. They made headway this seasona and it's ridiculous to think they would turn it around in a year. So grow up and gut it out. They took over a team that won 6-7 games a season with NO coaching. No one truly expected them to go to the playoffs, but the consensus was that they would perform no worse than under Jauron. Turns out the defense was far worse and the offense no different. You're ignoring all of that.
1B4IDie Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 (edited) You're right about that. They played 6 teams with winning records last year (8 games). You're also wrong about the number of returning starters. If you count TO, Trent Edwards, Roscoe/Nelson/Martin, the RT and Moats off the top of the head thats max 17 starters the same, I'm sure if I spent more than 1 second there are even less. You're also wrong about the 2009 season. It was a win now for DJ, his job was on the line from Day 1. The expectations in 2009 were best case a 10 win season, if Trent Edwards could have regained his form from early 2008. That all went in the toilet quick but don't pretend it wasn't a "Put up or shut up" season for DJ. Edited January 3, 2011 by Why So Serious?
Mr. WEO Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 You're also wrong about the number of returning starters. If you count TO, Trent Edwards, Roscoe/Nelson/Martin, the RT and Moats off the top of the head thats max 17 starters the same, I'm sure if I spent more than 1 second there are even less. You're also wrong about the 2009 season. It was a win now for DJ, his job was on the line from Day 1. The expectations in 2009 were best case a 10 win season, if Trent Edwards could have regained his form from early 2008. That all went in the toilet quick but don't pretend it wasn't a "Put up or shut up" season for DJ. Fitz was a starter in 8 games last year (and our leading passer). As with QB, there were other positions where multiple players started in different games. The starting lineup by week 3 was not much different than it was at the end of last season, despite this "rebuild" people are describing. It may have been a "win now" situation for Ralph, as he was dumb enough to resign DJ before the inevitable tanking of his 3rd season--but to say he was suddenly going to figure out how to coach a "no talent" team to 10 wins is.....interesting. Exactly how was this going to be achieved--with TO? Maybin? Let's put it another way--if Ralph had fired DJ after the 2008 season and brought in Chan, would 2009 have been a "must win" team? Would they have won 10 games? Turns out that Fitz is much better than Edwards (nice pickup, Chan) yet the offense STILL sucked under Gailey.
1B4IDie Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 Fitz was a starter in 8 games last year (and our leading passer). As with QB, there were other positions where multiple players started in different games. The starting lineup by week 3 was not much different than it was at the end of last season, despite this "rebuild" people are describing. It may have been a "win now" situation for Ralph, as he was dumb enough to resign DJ before the inevitable tanking of his 3rd season--but to say he was suddenly going to figure out how to coach a "no talent" team to 10 wins is.....interesting. Exactly how was this going to be achieved--with TO? Maybin? Let's put it another way--if Ralph had fired DJ after the 2008 season and brought in Chan, would 2009 have been a "must win" team? Would they have won 10 games? Turns out that Fitz is much better than Edwards (nice pickup, Chan) yet the offense STILL sucked under Gailey. Really? Ofcourse there are Differences in expectation for a coach on the job for the first season, bringing in all new offensive and defensive systems than a guy that had years to bring in his guys and his system and hasn't accomplished anything. How do you not understand that?
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 We won against the same sorry competition this year. This year's schedule turned out to be not so tough. We only faced 5 teams with winning records. Dude, you must be brain damaged. KC, Pitt, Balto, NE 2x, NYJ 2x, GB, Chicago ALL had winning records. That's 9 games, 7 teams.
Ramius Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 You do realize that a lot of teams with winning records bottomed out before improving. For example, tampa went from 9-7 to 3-13 in Morris' and Dominik's first season. Then they added talent through the draft and improved to 10 wins. As far as i'm concerned, we've bottomed out, like those teams did, so now its time to improve.
CodeMonkey Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 (edited) What the "koolaid drinkers", for lack of a better term, cling to are the intangible things they feel got better. For example you see things like "the team is better than their record", or "with a few breaks this was a 9-7 team", or "the players have bought into the system" etc. Things that are just opinion that cannot be quantified. And for those things, they feel Gailey, Nix, and the team as a whole improved from last season. Your opinion may vary. Edited January 3, 2011 by CodeMonkey
Rob's House Posted January 3, 2011 Posted January 3, 2011 (edited) 1. Getting TO was evidence that we were in a "win now" mode? First I'm hearing of that. It was widely regarded as a desperate ploy to sell tickets and jerseys. We were the same 6 or 7 win team we had been the previous 3 seasons. 2. 2010--everyone felt we in rebuild mode? Not the folks here a tTSW. 2. Most assumed (I was one) that Gailey would be able to win at least as many games as DJ. In fact, when national sports wags predicted 0-4 wins, this place went ballistic. 1. So 2009 was a rebuilding year? 2. Everyone thought 2010 was a rebuilding year. Some of us thought (especially prior to Butler and Schobel's retirements that the team could be competitive while rebuilding. Actually, at least 19 of 2010 starters were starters in 2009. Opening day starters? Or are you saying that at least 19 guys who started at least one game in 2009 started at least 1 game in 2010? This offense can't put points on the board. They had two big games scoring and that was it. They scored one more point per game than last season. In the last 6 games, the offense scored a total of 5 TDs. They scored none in the last 2 weeks. They averaged 7 points per game over their last 6 games. You might want to add "new OC" to your wish list. Gailey said Fitz got hurt early last week and didn't even play this wk, so I'm not sure what your point is. Not to mention the only two receivers that had any experience whatsoever going into this year have been sidelined for the last month or so. If we were told at the outset that our top 3 receivers in the last quarter of the season would be SJ, David Nelson, and Naaman Roosevelt I don't think you'd have heard a lot of optimism. Not to mention, regarding ppg, last years defense provided an abundance of turnovers as well as stops to give the offense more opportunities. If you can't see improvement from last years offense who specialized in 3 and outs, and this years then you're not really worth discussing this with. Edited January 3, 2011 by Rob's House
Recommended Posts