The attitude of a good coaching staff

[simpleman]

I read this quote on ESPN and wanted to share it.

 

Olson said. "So, our job as a coaching staff will be to identify the skill set of the players, who are our best players, what do they do best, and how can we put them in position to be successful and do what they do best."

 

To me that is the sign of a good coaching staff. I hope the new Bill's staff feels the same. Let the scouts and upper level management identify additions and subtractions, concentrate on making the best with the talent you have to work with right NOW. No more constantly trying to fit square pegs in round holes. Otherwise, we are subjected to another 3 year plan of "rebuilding" from scratch again, and another 3 years of mediocrity at best. Use what you have, putting them in a position to succeed. NO more wholesale rebuilding. Please!

Edited February 14, 2013 by simpleman

[xsoldier54]

I agree. That was the biggest flaw during the Gailey regime. They were terrible evaluators of talent and did not put players in position to succeed. Good coaches do that.

[KeisterHollow]

I agree. The Bills are not on a similar timetable as other teams with new staffs. This long, twenty year drought must end. We've got to see a disciplined, talented, aggressive team- I think that is the key; the team must be HUNGRY, it must be willing to do more, to do whatever, to become good and to win. From the personality of the two coaches - Pettine and Marone/Hackett - I think we'll be very young and aggressive on both sides of the ball.

 

As for past failure - I put it on the main coaches, and a good deal of the losing has to do with not having brought in a good QB in how many years now? To have only Fitz on the team has been a bit of a demoralizer, too. With a new QB, and a new staff, I think Nix does what he does best - evaluate - before he sails off into the sunset, leaving a team ready to be a contender for awhile.

 

I just read an article on the Bills being a big player for Alex Smith, if he were to become a F.A. - and, if Fitz would restructure, we pick up Smith, draft a couple linebackers and a big, fast WR (if not bring one in in FA), and the Bills could be a player next year. We'll just have to see how it plays out.

[The Senator]

The key to everything - EVERYTHING - is getting Matt Barkley in the draft.

 

Doug Marrone + Mike Pettine + Nate Hacket + Matt Barkley = Superbowl contenders for the next 10 years...

 

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

19 and 0 baby!!!!!

[Dr. K]

I agree. That was the biggest flaw during the Gailey regime. They were terrible evaluators of talent and did not put players in position to succeed. Good coaches do that.

 

I disagree. Gailey evaluated offensive talent well and got as much out of the players on that side of the ball as could reasonably be expected. Do you think, with the QB and receivers on his teams, somebody could have gotten a better passing game than the Bills did?

 

If he'd had a decent defensive coordinator then he'd still be coach of the Bills.

 

I think people are going to be surprised at the steps backward the offense is going to take under this new regime. Maybe a better defense will make up for it, but this quote from Olson about, "So, our job as a coaching staff will be to identify the skill set of the players, who are our best players, what do they do best, and how can we put them in position to be successful and do what they do best." is standard boilerplate talk from anyone who takes over a team. Every failed coach the Bills have had in the least ten years has said the same thing.

[Nervous Guy]

but this quote from Olson about, "So, our job as a coaching staff will be to identify the skill set of the players, who are our best players, what do they do best, and how can we put them in position to be successful and do what they do best." is standard boilerplate talk from anyone who takes over a team. Every failed coach the Bills have had in the least ten years has said the same thing.

 

yep, the logical conclusion is that for the last 10 years we had ****ty evaluators of talent....coupled with mind numbing play calling in critical situations on both sides of the line of scrimmage.

[simpleman]

I disagree. Gailey evaluated offensive talent well and got as much out of the players on that side of the ball as could reasonably be expected.

 

I find it hard to comprehend this statement. I guess we will find out this year. I think he totally misused CJ and the whole run game in particular. His selections from among our receivers was atrocious. Granted the talent was not great there beyond Stevie, but who and how he used them was very open for debate. And his unwavering support for two years of Fitz was the height of incompetency. As HEAD (not offensive) coach he should have been kicking and screaming for help at the QB position, instead he was all snug and comfy about not getting any real help at QB from upper level management. I still believe a good HEAD coach would have found a way to get McKelvin some real coaching, I still believe his potential was so huge and untapped, but I guess we will see how another coaching staff can deal with him (ours or most likely another team's). And his use of the long spent gimmicky wildcat and building it around a mediocre at everything, good at nothing Smith were a detriment to the team. Gailey is the opposite of every quality I would consider contributing to being a good Head Coach.

Edited February 14, 2013 by simpleman

[Mr. WEO]

I agree. That was the biggest flaw during the Gailey regime. They were terrible evaluators of talent and did not put players in position to succeed. Good coaches do that.

 

That's odd, because countless posters here constantly reminded us year after year that this was actually Chan's strength--making the best use of the talent he has and not forcing a square peg into a round whole, etc...

 

Now he's a bum. Go figure...

[Dr. K]

I find it hard to comprehend this statement. I guess we will find out this year. I think he totally misused CJ and the whole run game in particular. His selections from among our receivers was atrocious. Granted the talent was not great there beyond Stevie, but who and how he used them was very open for debate. And his unwavering support for two years of Fitz was the height of incompetency. As HEAD (not offensive) coach he should have been kicking and screaming for help at the QB position, instead he was all snug and comfy about not getting any real help at QB from upper level management. I still believe a good HEAD coach would have found a way to get McKelvin some real coaching, I still believe his potential was so huge and untapped, but I guess we will see how another coaching staff can deal with him (ours or most likely another team's). And his use of the long spent gimmicky wildcat and building it around a mediocre at everything, good at nothing Smith were a detriment to the team. Gailey is the opposite of every quality I would consider contributing to being a good Head Coach.

 

My point was that he made the best use (on offense) of the talent he had. Not that the Bills could not have used a better QB.

 

I think you can make a case that he could have used CJ better. But all those guys who thought that because CJ was averaging 5 yards a carry they should run him on third and short were idiots.

 

The earlier opined that Gailey made terrible use of the players he had. That's the thing I disagree with.

[CookieG]

I find it hard to comprehend this statement. I guess we will find out this year. I think he totally misused CJ and the whole run game in particular. His selections from among our receivers was atrocious. Granted the talent was not great there beyond Stevie, but who and how he used them was very open for debate. And his unwavering support for two years of Fitz was the height of incompetency. As HEAD (not offensive) coach he should have been kicking and screaming for help at the QB position, instead he was all snug and comfy about not getting any real help at QB from upper level management. I still believe a good HEAD coach would have found a way to get McKelvin some real coaching, I still believe his potential was so huge and untapped, but I guess we will see how another coaching staff can deal with him (ours or most likely another team's). And his use of the long spent gimmicky wildcat and building it around a mediocre at everything, good at nothing Smith were a detriment to the team. Gailey is the opposite of every quality I would consider contributing to being a good Head Coach.

 

I have a hard time comprehending THIS statement:

 

And his unwavering support for two years of Fitz was the height of incompetency.

 

Especially since the overriding theme of this thread is supposed to be this:

 

Olson said. "So, our job as a coaching staff will be to identify the skill set of the players, who are our best players, what do they do best, and how can we put them in position to be successful and do what they do best."

 

In that case..he did...exactly what you are saying a coach should do.

 

He should have hitched his star to Trent Edwards? Or provided unwavering support for that Gibral Hamden guy (or whoever he was)?

 

Buddy was too busy building a crappy defense to worry about the offense. That's always been the reason there hasn't been a QB drafted.

 

So Gailey isn't given a QB...and he does what you want him to do..tries to take a guy with a limited ceiling, and tries to put him in a position to succeed..and it is his fault for trying to do so?

 

I have no idea how doing the best with what you have translates into "the height of incompetency."

 

I find it more difficult to comprehend this statement:

 

I still believe a good HEAD coach would have found a way to get McKelvin some real coaching

 

Not only is he responsible for Buddy screw ups, but he's responsible for Jauron's wasted draft picks?

 

God knows Gailey had his problems..but people go way overboard in the scapegoat department.

Edited February 14, 2013 by CookieG

[CSBill]

I disagree. Gailey evaluated offensive talent well and got as much out of the players on that side of the ball as could reasonably be expected. Do you think, with the QB and receivers on his teams, somebody could have gotten a better passing game than the Bills did?

 

If he'd had a decent defensive coordinator then he'd still be coach of the Bills.

 

I totally agree with this, although I did question some things he did (pass happy at time, under-use of CJ Spiller, relying too much on Fitz), the real problem of this team over the past few years has been the defense. The offense has been relatively successful.

 

By the way, notice that the early moves of the new regime have been more on the defensive side of the ball--addition by subtraction, but moves nonetheless.

Edited February 15, 2013 by CSBill

[ganesh]

The key to everything - EVERYTHING - is getting Matt Barkley in the draft.

 

Doug Marrone + Mike Pettine + Nate Hacket + Matt Barkley = Superbowl contenders for the next 10 years...

 

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

19 and 0 baby!!!!!

 

+1. If Barkley is available at #8, the Bills simply have to make that pick. If Barkley is gone, then they should get EJ Manuel in the 2nd round.

[Green Lightning]

 

 

+1. If Barkley is available at #8, the Bills simply have to make that pick. If Barkley is gone, then they should get EJ Manuel in the 2nd round.

 

I want to see what Barkley does at the combine. I still question his arm strength and he seems a bit meek. I just want a guy with the big arm, accurate and a leader. I know, so does everyone else.

[K-9]

I'll worry about how the coaches best use player talents when I see more talented players than less talented players on this team. It's the old chicken salad/chicken schit routine. We'd all like to believe we are a good coaching staff away from being contenders but that's backwards. It starts with the players. We simply don't have enough good ones who can consistently make plays at their respective positions. You'd think watching them the last several years would be enough to prove that time and time again.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Mango]

I find it hard to comprehend this statement. I guess we will find out this year. I think he totally misused CJ and the whole run game in particular. His selections from among our receivers was atrocious. Granted the talent was not great there beyond Stevie, but who and how he used them was very open for debate. And his unwavering support for two years of Fitz was the height of incompetency. As HEAD (not offensive) coach he should have been kicking and screaming for help at the QB position, instead he was all snug and comfy about not getting any real help at QB from upper level management. I still believe a good HEAD coach would have found a way to get McKelvin some real coaching, I still believe his potential was so huge and untapped, but I guess we will see how another coaching staff can deal with him (ours or most likely another team's). And his use of the long spent gimmicky wildcat and building it around a mediocre at everything, good at nothing Smith were a detriment to the team. Gailey is the opposite of every quality I would consider contributing to being a good Head Coach.

 

part of the issue with cj is that he is a liability in pass protection. when we spread it out and give him space he is great, and we needed more of that. the issue is we spread it out and need to audible to a pass we have issues with more out wide we have less linemen, less protection. cj spiller is atrocious in pas protection, bottom of the league. the kid has huge skill. but in an offense built on scheme not skill, he can't be counted on in critical situations

[simpleman]

part of the issue with cj is that he is a liability in pass protection. when we spread it out and give him space he is great, and we needed more of that. the issue is we spread it out and need to audible to a pass we have issues with more out wide we have less linemen, less protection. cj spiller is atrocious in pas protection, bottom of the league. the kid has huge skill. but in an offense built on scheme not skill, he can't be counted on in critical situations

 

I won't disagree with you that cj is not good in pass protection. But he is absolutely amazing in space. A good coach understands that and knows that he is a threat in space either running or catching the ball. They should be able to design plays to maximize his talents and use other players in combination with him to complement and fill in for his weaknesses. I don't think anyone thinks he is a every down back, but a coach needs to understand how to assemble the talent he has available and put it on the field in such a manner that everyone complements each other. There are no perfect players or complete players, that is why football is a team sport, not an individual sport.

Truly great coaches are the coaches that can complete the puzzle of a perfect team out of a number of imperfect pieces/players. That's what I see in the original quote.

Edited February 15, 2013 by simpleman

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I won't disagree with you that cj is not good in pass protection. But he is absolutely amazing in space. A good coach understands that and knows that he is a threat in space either running or catching the ball. They should be able to design plays to maximize his talents and use other players in combination with him to complement and fill in for his weaknesses. I don't think anyone thinks he is a every down back, but a coach needs to understand how to assemble the talent he has available and put it on the field in such a manner that everyone complements each other. There are no perfect players or complete players, that is why football is a team sport, not an individual sport.

Truly great coaches are the coaches that can complete the puzzle of a perfect team out of a number of imperfect pieces/players. That's what I see in the original quote.

 

That's where you would be wrong.

 

There seem to be lots of people here who think CJ is an every-down back.

[KeisterHollow]

I think C.J. could carry a team for a while, I believe he is at his best when matched up with a bigger change of pase back. I like Fred, but they were not used as much together as I would have predicted; I think a fullback - a real thumper, good blocker, who was also fast (San Fran's Delanie Walker is BIG on my wish list for Buffalo) comes to mind.

 

As for Buffalo at 8 - I've said, if Barkley is there at 8, I just can't see Buffalo passing on him. The video I watched of him - even in 2012 - was quite good. His arm was plenty strong enough to hit NFL type throws. Tyler Wilson also struck out at me. When watching him I was, more than any other guy in the draft (except for when Bray is on), convinced his skills were NFL ready - and already I think he'd be an above average NFL QB.

This is the tip of what I've been saying for a while now is a very solid QB group for Buffalo to choose from this year. Despite the lack of elite talent, there are some 5-7 guys who could all go between rounds 1 and early 3. Any one could catch on with the right team and be a decent to good starter right away. It's just on Buffalo's staff to be able to identify the QB's who ARE good enough, and then to know when to get them - and they really can't miss again, because the last two years have been cases of "their guy" getting taken out from under them.

[Rockinon]

That's odd, because countless posters here constantly reminded us year after year that this was actually Chan's strength--making the best use of the talent he has and not forcing a square peg into a round whole, etc...

 

Now he's a bum. Go figure...

You hit the nail on the head. This team is was very weak in receiving options last year, yet Gailey still wanted to force the pass. The success as an offensive guru is there. He just put too much faith in his ability to make guys like Donald Jones into stars, a bit over the top if you ask me. That plus leaving the defense completely in Wannstedts hands was a big mistake. I liked Gailey, but the bottom line is he had horrible talent at receiver/TE, a horrible defensive coach and oh ya......horrible LB play.

[benderbender]

I felt Gailey showed up with a shucks attitude and when things didn't work out he almost had an "i told you so" attitude at pressers