Chan 29th best coach?

[tennesseeboy]

Any way you look at it i think he is a lot better than what we had ! Just in his on the field presence . Gailey has 100 times more enthusiasm than Jauron ever thought of having on the field or in pracice .

 

And a team takes on it's coach demeanor !!

 

If Jauron's on field persona is anything like his bed room persona i feel really bad for his old lady --- WOW !!!

I'm not too happy with yours, give them a blank check and wait around for years for something to happen (see..Jauron,Mularky, Williams et al.) Losers stink of losing, and your better players are going to exit (see Peters, Leonard, Greer, Spikes, Clement, Winfield et al) or they retire before their time (see Schobel, Hansen et al.) You gotta learn to win and the coach (and GM of course) have to deliver sooner or later. I'd want to see progress after the second year at least. Nine wins or out.

[Dorkington]

I don't think players determine how good a coach is. Only how many wins he gets.

 

A good coach is someone who gets the best out of his players. If we had 2-14 talent last year but still won 4 games, then Chan is already a good coach.

We had mostly the same team as a team that got 6 wins the year before, one could easily say we had a 6 win team and Chan made it worse.

 

I'm not convinced he's a good coach until we start producing wins.

 

That being said, I *like* him way more than I liked Dick, and I'm pulling for him to turn the team around. I think its a possibility, but I can't say anything other than stuff like that for now.

[Jauronimo]

We had mostly the same team as a team that got 6 wins the year before, one could easily say we had a 6 win team and Chan made it worse.

 

I'm not convinced he's a good coach until we start producing wins.

 

That being said, I *like* him way more than I liked Dick, and I'm pulling for him to turn the team around. I think its a possibility, but I can't say anything other than stuff like that for now.

 

One could easily apply specious reasoning to all sorts of things. By ignoring all other factors such as strength of schedule, system change, different roster, we can compare apples to oranges and arrive at an overly simplistic conclusion most of the time. Sure its easy, but is that really what you want to accomplish?

 

I want to see wins too before I give Chan the key to the city, but you give a new coach longer than 2 seasons given the situation he walked in to and what he is trying to do. If he were taking over the same schemes and systems that the prior coach established then you can have different expectations, shorter leash. Changing things up after 2 years, in most cases, is a bad idea. The exceptions are guys like J. McDaniels who lost the locker room and alienated everyone in Denver, N. Saban who never had the locker room, etc.

[hondo in seattle]

We had mostly the same team as a team that got 6 wins the year before, one could easily say we had a 6 win team and Chan made it worse.

 

I'm not convinced he's a good coach until we start producing wins.

 

That being said, I *like* him way more than I liked Dick, and I'm pulling for him to turn the team around. I think its a possibility, but I can't say anything other than stuff like that for now.

 

I think Chan will prove himself a better coach than Dick because of his superior leadership skills. Yet I do actually believe our coaching was worse last year than the year prior - on Defense and Special Teams - and that explains our drop in wins.

 

I'm glad Chan hired Stache-Wanny because Edwards - in his first year as a coordinator - was clearly not Fewell's equal. (Fewell's Giants were #7 in the NFL in yards allowed last year). And let's remember Jauron was himself a competent defensive coach.

 

And as much as I liked Bruce DeHaven his first go around with the Bills, I'm starting to wonder if the NFL is passing him by. Bobby April is a tough act to follow and I'm not sure Bruce is up to the task.

[Direhard Fan]

Ah Your never going to paint my house with an additude like that. What team ever excells the 1st year with a new head coach and GM? They are doing what has to be done and I believe we will see excellent results if we have a full season. Lighten up and enjoy the court hearings.

[Direhard Fan]

Ah you will never paint my house with that bad additude. Lighten up and enjoy the court battle.

[Van_phelaN1]

You knowm billsfreak, all you say is true, but, for some reason, I like Gailey. Even though they lost more games, I found the effort and game day competance so far above what we had grown accustomed to, under Jauron. Funny, Jauron was always labled as some "great teacher", but I would sum up his tenure the same way they are criticizing Gailey here.

 

I don't think in all the time Jauron was here, any player really improved. I suppose Jason Peters would be the only example. Guys would come in, and show some flashes as a rookie, and then, they never made any real impact, anywhere, except maybe, special teams, if we were lucky.

 

To me Gailey, albeit after only one year, seems like such an improvement. When he talks, he sounds like a football coach, and he sounds confident. His track record may be spotty, or mediocre, but he has pretty much always been in dysfunctional situations. When he was HC in Dallas, his owner was always looking for a bigger name, and he had a hard time getting established vets (namely Aikman) on board with his game plans.

 

Honestly, you probably like Gailey for the same reason I do. He just looks, acts, and talks like he KNOWS the game and KNOWS what he is doing. It is easy to get behind a guy like that after dealing with Jauron. When he talked he always sounded like he didn't know what was wrong or how to fix it. He always said they would "work on it."

 

At least with Gailey, you can see improvement offensively for this team (in a sense) and now you are starting to see guys really buy in (as players I mean). I agree that he hasn't really accomplished anything, but I have also heard Jerry Jones say he should have given Gailey a fair chance and Cower sings his praises. Let's see how it translates. I think 29th is a little low but with only one year to look at and the kind of season it was, I guess I am not surprised by the ranking. These things are all opinion based anyway.

[ganesh]

I love your plan. It rewards coaches who cling to mediocrity and punishes those who take risks and try to install new systems. Changing coaches every 2 years for failing to break the 9 win barrier is the way to go. It perpetuates the rebuilding process, which is the most exciting time for the fans. Who doesn't love a 10 year rebuild characterized by total discontinuity and radical changes in direction? Oakland has demonstrated that this approach can deliver the occasional 8-8 season, which proves the system works.

 

On to Chan's mistakes. Contrary to popular belief, Gailey doesn't make personnel decisions. He doesn't sign or draft players. Addressing the talent gap in a sustainable way takes time, and is the responsibility of the GM. Is there ever really a good time to change defenses? Do you ever have all the pieces for a 3-4 and 4-3 simultaneously? You can either continue playing 4-3 while drafting 3-4 and wait until the pieces are there, or you can start playing and drafting in the new system so that its a mature system by the time the pieces are in place. Is one option that much better than the other?

 

He is responsible for getting his draft picks on the field. Unfortunately, none of the 8 players drafted last year started for the Bills consistently. That is on the coach and his staff.

 

If Chan really wanted a 3-4 defense, then he should have hired someone who is well versed in it or at least kept Fewell back. Instead, he chose Edwards who has been horrible.

[tennesseeboy]

ok...we know Chan is not the number one coach in the league...not having made the playoffs. We know he probably doesn't belong in the top 15...losing record. We know he didn't have a great draft last year, at least based on last year's performance...we know he wasn't active with nix in free agency or trade...we know he let at least one good solid offensive lineman, Incognito, go. Frankly 29 sounds pretty generous based on all objective evidence of his performance as head coach of the Buffalo Bills. Will that change? I hope so. But "potential" and $.59 will get you a senior coffee at Bojangles if you're a senior citizen.

 

I understand people WANTING Chan to be a great coach. I understand that there were some signs of life in the second half of last year. I understand that this particular draft actually looks good on paper. Even with all of that...the facts as of this moment warrant Chan's ranking.

[Orton's Arm]

ok...we know Chan is not the number one coach in the league...not having made the playoffs. We know he probably doesn't belong in the top 15...losing record. We know he didn't have a great draft last year, at least based on last year's performance...we know he wasn't active with nix in free agency or trade...we know he let at least one good solid offensive lineman, Incognito, go. Frankly 29 sounds pretty generous based on all objective evidence of his performance as head coach of the Buffalo Bills. Will that change? I hope so. But "potential" and $.59 will get you a senior coffee at Bojangles if you're a senior citizen.

 

I understand people WANTING Chan to be a great coach. I understand that there were some signs of life in the second half of last year. I understand that this particular draft actually looks good on paper. Even with all of that...the facts as of this moment warrant Chan's ranking.

I disagree with the idea that a losing record precludes a coach from being in the top-15. Barry Switzer owns a Super Bowl ring, but that doesn't mean he was a better head coach for the Cowboys than Belichick was for the Cleveland Browns. The right questions to ask when evaluating a head coach are things like, "Did he get the most possible out of the players he had?" "Did he tend to get outsmarted on game day, or was he the one outsmarting the other guy?" "How good are the assistants he hired?"

 

Also, your post seems to blur the distinction between head coach and general manager; with you holding Gailey responsible not just for his own decisions, but Nix's as well. I'll grant that Gailey almost certainly campaigned heavily for a "waterbug" running back, and almost certainly told Nix that Spiller fit that definition to a tee. I'll also grant that Spiller didn't play as well as you'd expect from a rookie running back picked ninth overall. For the sake of argument, let's suppose Spiller's career won't be any better than you'd expect from a RB picked in the second or third round. If that turns out to be the case, the ultimate responsibility for that is on Nix, not Gailey. Sometimes a head coach will get more excited about a college player than is justified. When that happens, it's the GM's job to be a cooler head, and to provide a more accurate assessment of the player's potential. That's the whole point in having a GM in the first place!

[tennesseeboy]

The point in the draft is that Gailey campaigned for and got Spiller instead of any of the tackles available (Davis or Bulaga) or any other offensive lineman. (Pouncey?). Couple that with getting spiller (a waterbug?) when you already have both a beastmode back (Lynch) and a very good running back (Jackson). I don't see a huge window to turning the team around. Saban, Knox, and Levy all showed a major improvement by the end of their second season. I'm not being inflexible as factors such as injury or holdouts, or other uncontrollable factors can impede getting there right away (and I'm forgiving of Gailey's first year because of his trying Trent Edwards out a lot longer than he should have.)

 

Winning is the measure. If you don't win you might be able to offer excuses, but the standard is winning versus losoing. So far Chan is a loser. Hopefully that will change this year!

[paintmyhouse]

Chan is not a good coach. Look at all the Georgia Tech guys in the NFL, lots of really good players, he recruited well, but is a stubborn old man who thinks his offense can be run by mediocre to crap QBs, he has a very readable and distinct history of repeating the same thing.

[eball]

The point in the draft is that Gailey campaigned for and got Spiller instead of any of the tackles available (Davis or Bulaga) or any other offensive lineman. (Pouncey?).

link to a quote, article, or anything at all suggesting Gailey "campaigned" for Spiller against the wishes of Nix?

[tennesseeboy]

link to a quote, article, or anything at all suggesting Gailey "campaigned" for Spiller against the wishes of Nix?

When did I say he did anything "against the wishes" of Nix. He was big on Spiller, using he waterbug quote considerably before the actual draft.

 

See, for instance,

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/article43625.ece

 

"Bills coach Chan Gailey said at the NFL owners meetings in March that he would like to have

 

a change-of-pace back at his disposal in the Bills' new offense. The Bills' offense needs

 

something special in the worst way."

[Orton's Arm]

The point in the draft is that Gailey campaigned for and got Spiller instead of any of the tackles available (Davis or Bulaga) or any other offensive lineman. (Pouncey?). Couple that with getting spiller (a waterbug?) when you already have both a beastmode back (Lynch) and a very good running back (Jackson). I don't see a huge window to turning the team around. Saban, Knox, and Levy all showed a major improvement by the end of their second season. I'm not being inflexible as factors such as injury or holdouts, or other uncontrollable factors can impede getting there right away (and I'm forgiving of Gailey's first year because of his trying Trent Edwards out a lot longer than he should have.)

 

Winning is the measure. If you don't win you might be able to offer excuses, but the standard is winning versus losoing. So far Chan is a loser. Hopefully that will change this year!

You make a good point. If a head coach tells the general manager, "these are the kinds of players I need to succeed," it's natural for the GM to listen. In this case, Gailey apparently said something along the lines of, "I need a waterbug to make my offense work." If Spiller fails to live up to his lofty draft position, I'd assign perhaps 1/3 of the blame for that to Gailey (assuming he campaigned for Spiller as his waterbug), and 2/3 of the blame to Nix.

 

I fully agree that RB was not a need. Further, RBs tend to have short careers, so you hate to start off a rebuilding effort by drafting one.

[spartacus]

He is responsible for getting his draft picks on the field. Unfortunately, none of the 8 players drafted last year started for the Bills consistently. That is on the coach and his staff.

 

If Chan really wanted a 3-4 defense, then he should have hired someone who is well versed in it or at least kept Fewell back. Instead, he chose Edwards who has been horrible.

 

what really hurts is that Edwards is still the DC - after proving he is totally inept running a 3-4 (and a 4-3)

[BillsVet]

I think Chan will prove himself a better coach than Dick because of his superior leadership skills. Yet I do actually believe our coaching was worse last year than the year prior - on Defense and Special Teams - and that explains our drop in wins.

 

I'm glad Chan hired Stache-Wanny because Edwards - in his first year as a coordinator - was clearly not Fewell's equal. (Fewell's Giants were #7 in the NFL in yards allowed last year). And let's remember Jauron was himself a competent defensive coach.

 

 

George Edwards was DC for Washington in 2003, so it's not as though he's a rookie at this. This coaching staff is about as unproven as the team they're leading.

[thewildrabbit]

I think Chan will prove himself a better coach than Dick because of his superior leadership skills. Yet I do actually believe our coaching was worse last year than the year prior - on Defense and Special Teams - and that explains our drop in wins.

 

I'm glad Chan hired Stache-Wanny because Edwards - in his first year as a coordinator - was clearly not Fewell's equal. (Fewell's Giants were #7 in the NFL in yards allowed last year). And let's remember Jauron was himself a competent defensive coach.

 

And as much as I liked Bruce DeHaven his first go around with the Bills, I'm starting to wonder if the NFL is passing him by. Bobby April is a tough act to follow and I'm not sure Bruce is up to the task.

Gailey's failure has already reared its ugly head in many areas, like Jauron he hired a bunch of assistant coaches that have no experience as NFL assistants and therefore they failed with players Cornell Green, CJ Spiller and others. Trying to run a 3-4 with not having the proper personnel for it. Gaileys problem is because he hired inexperienced assistants he is forced to train his coaches all the while he is trying to train his players at the same time, he is trying to do to much, wear to many hats.

 

The man got fired as OC in KC because he tried to run the pistol offense in the NFL, while failing at winning games. It looks eerily similar to what happened last year in Buffalo, no running game to control the clock and the QB slinging it all over in losing efforts.

 

 

I have to say that both the defense and offense showed flashes of being decent in some games, QB Ryan Fitzpatrick showed flashes of brilliance in some games, fell on his face in others. The defense also showed flashes in some games. but played worse last year with basically the same players from the Jauron -Fewell era.

 

Overall, Gailey is noted for being an offensive minded coach and knowing how to build a good offense. Yet this man failed to properly coach up Spiller, and failed badly on that offensive line. I never would have thought that the O line could get worse then it did under Jauron, but Gailey and his inexperienced staff managed it.

 

The running game got worse, special teams got worse, the defense got much worse and all with basically the same players under Dick Jauron- Perry Fewell.

 

Gailey gets an "F" in my view for his 4-12 season and should have never been hired as a head coach again in the NFL IMO. That said, I hope he makes me eat my words... I highly doubt he will tho.

[Bangarang]

But, we lost a great Defensive coordinator (Fewell) and the D went down as a result. If Edward's can't get this D together the first few games (i.e. if the Pats explode on us) then it's time to demote Edwards to LB coach where he belongs and promote Wanny.

 

Wanny is already the Asst. Head Coach. Making him the Defensive Coordinator would be a demotion. Unless you're talking about making him the Asst. HC/Def. Coordinator.

[DanInUticaTampa]

stink of losing, and your better players are going to exit (see Peters, Leonard, Greer, Spikes, Clement, Winfield et al)

 

That is just silly. Leonard didn't leave the bills because we were losing. The guy never did anything for us on field except special teams (can blame that on coaching). He didn't leave because he said "he, this team sucks, I am going to a winner." The guy was cut because he didn't contribute. Spikes was cut because of an injury he couldn't come back from, and went to another losing team. Clements went to a losing team, but only for a bigger paycheck. Peters went to a winning team, but only because of a bigger paycheck. Same with winfield. And Greer was let go because we were too deep at DB.

 

Players didn't leave this team because the bills were losers. They left because the bills didn't want them or the left because they were seeking more money than they were worth. Honestly, if Peters, leonard, greer, spikes, clements, and winfield were all still on the team, we wouldn't be that much better, if at all. Peters and winfield would be the only improvements, and the rest would actually be a downgrade. So we very well could be worse without them.

 

As far as recruiting free agents is concerned, I believe that is his biggest weakness since he was out of the nfl for awhile and he just didn't seem to attract anyone interesting, including coaches.

 

But this team doesn't need an spikes, peters, greer, and clements. What this team needs is a tom brady, a jake long, a clay mathews, a ryan clark, and maybe a few others depending on how this draft class turns out.