Did anyone $&^@ this team more last year than Dave Wannstedt?

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I understand what you're saying but what you said puts all of the blame on Wanny. Sheppard and Williams flat out sucked. He didn't have a healthy Mario the first five game, a strong Dareus, a healthy Kyle, or Anderson for more than 5 games. His entire defense was predicated on those four guys getting substantial pressure and they just didn't. Some of it was his fault and a large portion wasn't.

 

You're no fun.

 

All I want is to be able to kick a guy while he's down a few times and piss on his motionless career.

 

[Kelly the Dog]

You're no fun.

 

All I want is to be able to kick a guy while he's down a few times and piss on his motionless career.

 

Why didn't you say so?!

 

It was all Wanny's fault!!

[Mr. WEO]

Huh, and here I thought Gailey picked his staff. Any link to back up your contention that Nix brought in Wannstedt?

 

Note, I am not claiming that Nix is not ultimately responsible for the performance of the coaching staff, but I think it matters that he is not the one picking assistant coaches.

 

Gailey did pick his staff and he picked George Edwards. After that was recognized as a flop in one year, who do you think suggested that Gailey's DC pick needed some help in the form of Wanny? Gailey?

 

Can't wait for you to praise the job Pettine and staff do this season, and fail to give Nix a shred of benefit for the roster. And you call ME a crusader?

 

If Pettine produces a solid defense why wouldn't I praise him? If it's good, I'll say so. I am able to recognize the obvious. You crusade agaisnt it by telling us day is night and night is day.

 

 

It's not his fault all he did was answer the phone? What about the part that he accepted the job and didn't do it?

 

Actually, he did what only what he is capable of. Wanny was never a defensive genius. Thinking this guy was going to turn the D around was insane--especially after he failed to have any impact after he was brought in to help out Curious George run the D. Anyone at the time should have seen this was a bad promotion.

[Leelee Phoenix]

On offense, Gailey also had a less than optimal player mix. There was no one at QB, only one real WR, injuries on the OL, injuries at RB, etc. Gailey used creativity and ingenuity to deal with those problems. He squeezed a lot more production out of that offense than its talent level warranted.

I don't agree. Gailey's offenses were 28th, 14th and 21st in the league. Gailey had some decent parts to work with. A potentially great RB that he refused to use. An above-average OL for most of his time. Fitz wasn't optimal, but I still think he's a passable starter in the league (and let's not forget that his choice was Trent Edwards, Gailey is the WORST at determining QBs).

 

I think suggesting that Gailey was some offensive guru here is a stretch. Gailey got a pass until the end because he wasn't Jauron, and his offenses were slightly more fun to watch. At the cost of being possibly the worst defensive coach ever.

[Kelly the Dog]

Gailey did pick his staff and he picked George Edwards. After that was recognized as a flop in one year, who do you think suggested that Gailey's DC pick needed some help in the form of Wanny? Gailey?

Yes. Gailey was the one with the relationship with Wanny, not Nix. Although I'm sure Nix was all for it. Wanny hired Gailey as his OC when Wanny was in Miami. After Wanny left Pitt and was looking for a job, Gailey returned the favor and wanted to lean on Wanny's expertise, likely because he saw that Edwards was a little over his head.

 

I don't agree. Gailey's offenses were 28th, 14th and 21st in the league. Gailey had some decent parts to work with. A potentially great RB that he refused to use. An above-average OL for most of his time. Fitz wasn't optimal, but I still think he's a passable starter in the league (and let's not forget that his choice was Trent Edwards, Gailey is the WORST at determining QBs).

 

I think suggesting that Gailey was some offensive guru here is a stretch. Gailey got a pass until the end because he wasn't Jauron, and his offenses were slightly more fun to watch. At the cost of being possibly the worst defensive coach ever.

Gailey inherited Edwards as the starter, and typical of Edwards, he played great in practice and in preseason Gailey's first year. Fitz was brought in to be the back-up. Gailey saw when the real bullets flew that Edwards was a different guy, recognized it immediately and got rid of him. That was actually to Gailey's credit. Plus, Gailey completely left the defense to the DC and concentrated on offense and some special teams. So you can't at all say he was the worst defensive coach ever. He made virtually no decisions on defense. In fact, you could highly criticize him for NOT taking a biigger role on defense and stepping in and ordering Wanny to change it up a bit when it was already a disaster.

 

Some coaches are managers and some stick to what their specialty is. Marrone is the opposite of Gailey, and even though he is an offensive coach, he is taking to leadership role in all three phases.

[MRW]

Gailey did pick his staff and he picked George Edwards. After that was recognized as a flop in one year, who do you think suggested that Gailey's DC pick needed some help in the form of Wanny? Gailey?

As Kelly said, yes, I'm fairly sure that Wannstedt was Gailey's pick. It would not surprise me if Nix said, hey, the guy you hired sucks, get him some help, but I don't think he said, hey, the guy you hired sucks, let's get Dave Wannstedt in here.

[bladiebla]

With regards to the question of who hired Wannstedt... We did... We wanted Edwards out of here and Wannstedt in... sadly One Bills Drive listened...

[San Jose Bills Fan]

With regards to the question of who hired Wannstedt... We did... We wanted Edwards out of here and Wannstedt in... sadly One Bills Drive listened...

 

Hey, I and others owned this.

 

And if the alternative was retaining Edwards, then we weren't really wrong lobbying for improvement via a coaching change.

 

The fact Wanny's D was even worse than Edwards' doesn't make wanting to replace Edwards with Wanny wrong.

 

As it turns out neither one was good enough.

 

At least we got the chance to witness this first hand as opposed to wondering about it.

[K-9]

Hey, I and others owned this.

 

And if the alternative was retaining Edwards, then we weren't really wrong lobbying for improvement via a coaching change.

 

The fact Wanny's D was even worse than Edwards' doesn't make wanting to replace Edwards with Wanny wrong.

 

As it turns out neither one was good enough.

 

At least we got the chance to witness this first hand as opposed to wondering about it.

 

Gee, I wonder what Edwards' and Wanny's defenses had in common. Hmm.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Gee, I wonder what Edwards' and Wanny's defenses had in common. Hmm.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

BAD COACHING!!!

 

:wallbash:

 

:D

[Sisyphean Bills]

The fact Wanny's D was even worse than Edwards' doesn't make wanting to replace Edwards with Wanny wrong.

 

I rather think it does, especially since you are claiming the problem was mostly coaching. You're trying to have it both ways here. Replacing one guy that sucks at his job with a totally incompetent employee is always a mistake; a mistake that gets people fired in many cases, including this one.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I rather think it does, especially since you are claiming the problem was mostly coaching. You're trying to have it both ways here. Replacing one guy that sucks at his job with a totally incompetent employee is always a mistake; a mistake that gets people fired in many cases, including this one.

 

If you could have known Wanny was incompetent you might have a valid point.

 

But you couldn't because Wanny actually had a very good NFL resume.

 

So you're wrong.

 

It was obvious that Edwards sucked.

 

They had a guy already on staff who had solid credentials. It was a no-brainer to promote him to see what he could do.

 

What did you think the Bills should do after the 2011 season regarding DC?

[Sisyphean Bills]

If you could have known Wanny was incompetent you might have a valid point.

So, you think that decisions that turn out very badly should be forgiven if the intention was otherwise. Is your world full of unicorns that eat rainbows and poop butterflies?

But you couldn't because Wanny actually had a very good NFL resume.

He had a "good" resume being Jimmy Johnson's caddy eons ago. He was drummed out of the NFL and his work with the LBs the year before was unimpressive and turned out to be a vastly more accurate indication of what he would do than his resume with the Cowboys 20 years earlier.

So you're wrong.

It seems very important to you to always be "right", however Gailey and Wannstedt got themselves fired for this so-called "no-brainer" decision. So, I think it is crystal clear what the final decision was as far as Brandon and Nix. The "no-brainer" as you call it was not forgiven. It was a VERY wrong move. The easy hire in this case was a major !@#$-up. It's indisputable.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

So, you think that decisions that turn out very badly should be forgiven if the intention was otherwise. Is your world full of unicorns that eat rainbows and poop butterflies?

I live in a results-based world where if you do poorly, people will tell you to your face. But thanks for the additional insult.

 

Without the (impossible to know) prior knowledge that this would turn out badly yes, the decision could be forgiven. There was no reason to think that he wouldn't be an improvement over Edwards.

He had a "good" resume being Jimmy Johnson's caddy eons ago. He was drummed out of the NFL and his work with the LBs the year before was unimpressive and turned out to be a vastly more accurate indication of what he would do than his resume with the Cowboys 20 years earlier.

Wrong. Wanny did good work with the Bears and with the Dolphins defense.

It seems very important to you to always be "right", however Gailey and Wannstedt got themselves fired for this so-called "no-brainer" decision. So, I think it is crystal clear what the final decision was as far as Brandon and Nix. The "no-brainer" as you call it was not forgiven. It was a VERY wrong move. The easy hire in this case was a major !@#$-up. It's indisputable.

I'm defending my position. You're the one attacking it. I'm more intent on being right than you are?

 

Moreover, I already admitted I was for replacing Edwards with Wanny and thought it was a good move.

 

In other words, admitted I was WRONG but according to you it's obviously important that I'm always right.

 

:wallbash: :wallbash:

 

What you again can't seem to grasp is that it's only possible to call it the wrong move in retrospect.

 

Of course it turned out to be a "major !@#$ -up."

 

Anyone can see that. The question is how many people knew it wouldn't work out BEFORE the 2012 season?

 

Which brings me back to my earlier question to you: What did you think of the move when it happened?

 

Were you predicting failure?

[Thurmal34]

He had a "good" resume being Jimmy Johnson's caddy eons ago.

 

Not sure, but how were his defenses as CHI and MIA's HC? Anyone have any stats?

 

It will be interesting to see who ends up being credited for hiring Pettine.

 

 

[Joe W]

And who hired Nix - Branden. As long as Branden has any power in the organization this team is going nowhere And it won't be until Wilson sells the team that Branden gets fired

[Kelly the Dog]

Not sure, but how were his defenses as CHI and MIA's HC? Anyone have any stats?

 

It will be interesting to see who ends up being credited for hiring Pettine.

They were very good, and he ran the defense. He was a crappy head coach but his defenses were always very good.

[eball]

And who hired Nix - Branden. As long as Branden has any power in the organization this team is going nowhere And it won't be until Wilson sells the team that Branden gets fired

 

Your points carry much less emphasis when you don't even care enough to spell the individuals' names correctly.

 

They were very good, and he ran the defense. He was a crappy head coach but his defenses were always very good.

 

Which is precisely why so many of us were excited he would be running the defense. Those critical of my initial point in this thread would have everyone believe we all "should have known" Wanny was useless and Buddy was a fool for permitting Gailey to have him run the defense.

[Sisyphean Bills]

I live in a results-based world where if you do poorly, people will tell you to your face. But thanks for the additional insult.

 

Without the (impossible to know) prior knowledge that this would turn out badly yes, the decision could be forgiven. There was no reason to think that he wouldn't be an improvement over Edwards.

 

Wrong. Wanny did good work with the Bears and with the Dolphins defense.

 

I'm defending my position. You're the one attacking it. I'm more intent on being right than you are?

 

Moreover, I already admitted I was for replacing Edwards with Wanny and thought it was a good move.

 

In other words, admitted I was WRONG but according to you it's obviously important that I'm always right.

 

:wallbash: :wallbash:

 

What you again can't seem to grasp is that it's only possible to call it the wrong move in retrospect.

 

Of course it turned out to be a "major !@#$ -up."

 

Anyone can see that. The question is how many people knew it wouldn't work out BEFORE the 2012 season?

 

Which brings me back to my earlier question to you: What did you think of the move when it happened?

 

Were you predicting failure?

 

If you are being sincere in this post, then I find it fundamentally contradicts your own previous take. If the results matter, then it is perfectly legitimate to use the results to evaluate decisions that were made. It is not "wrong" as you previously stated. The results either validate the decision or they do not. Your previous statement was so extreme and so illogical that the only justification appeared to be that you thought Dave Wannstedt's promotion was a brilliant decision at the time and were/are, for personal reasons, continuing to attempt to defend that promotion. I can think of no other reason that someone would objectively, at this point in time and with 20/20 hindsight, argue that the decision must be considered flawless and a "no-brainer".

 

Yes, I had serious doubts about the move at the time. Ralph Wilson was also concerned enough to call everyone to Detroit. I know some others that were skeptical as well. So, yes, it wasn't the case that everyone was 100% sold.

 

As far as who I would hire, I don't think that is relevant to the point whatsoever. It's like asking, what's your favorite color?

 

My concerns were first about the process. You don't always get the best people when you never look beyond the 4 walls of the building that you're sitting in at the moment. Secondly, Wannstedt had coached some good defenses in past eras, but he was philosophically opposed to the direction that Buddy Nix had been taking the prior two years. Third, I scoff at the idea he had no input to the George Edwards defense of the year before. The decline in blitzing contradicted that assumption. And, lastly, Wannstedt's work with the linebackers was mediocre at best.

 

PS: Even with those concerns above, I was wrong in the sense that I did not see Wannstedt as being historically terrible. He was far worse than I imagined at the time. Also, I like you had hoped that despite concerns, he would actually improve the defense. Turns out, we were both fools.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Which is precisely why so many of us were excited he would be running the defense. Those critical of my initial point in this thread would have everyone believe we all "should have known" Wanny was useless and Buddy was a fool for permitting Gailey to have him run the defense.

Many people did believe that Wannstedt was the new messiah for Bills football. It may even be true that Nix and Gailey likewise believed that. It's not the straw-man that "everyone should have known he'd fail", it is that he did fail, and failed spectacularly, that casts into question everyone involved in the evaluation process that led to that failure. Do you really think Russ Brandon and Ralph Wilson don't go back and assess these situations based on the results? I know other businesses re-assess directions and decisions all the time.

 

PS: Ultimately, the decision-makers have to get it right more often than they get it wrong in order to turn around a team mired in mediocrity. So, it may not be "fair" in the sense that the expectations must be higher, but it is a necessity for the team to turn it around and become successful. As an extreme example, I don't believe it would be a good decision to hire John Madden as your head coach in 2013, despite his resume -- and I suspect many would agree. Therefore, it would be wise to question a process that arrived at such a conclusion.