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

[San Jose Bills Fan]

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.

 

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.

 

The first bolded is what you excerpted from my post and chose to respond to. It's also a point that I'm flabbergasted someone would even bother to argue.

 

The second bolded is the part of your post that I've been responding to.

 

Wanny had a good track record after his Dallas tenure, contrary to your earlier statement.

 

Therefore there was some basis for thinking that he would do well in replacing Edwards who indisputably sucked.

 

You're trying to make the case that it was clear that Wanny was "totally incompetent" before the 2012 season.

 

I and most others disagree.

 

The hiring of Wanny was largely seen by most here as both a logical move and as a probably upgrade based on his long resume of defensive success.

Edited April 21, 2013 by San Jose Bills Fan

[Sisyphean Bills]

You're trying to make the case that it was clear that Wanny was "totally incompetent" before the 2012 season.

 

That is uncategorically false. You've missed the point.

[Kirby Jackson]

I think that most everyone was happy with the hire at the time. It turns out that we were wrong and he was an epic failure in his role.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I think that most everyone was happy with the hire at the time. It turns out that we were wrong and he was an epic failure in his role.

 

Exactly.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Who cares what we thought at the time? At the time I thought it was a good idea to draft Mike Williams 3rd overall. When that became a failure I wanted people held accountable, not because I knew all along, but because it's their job to get it right regardless of what I think. It's a results-based business.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Who cares what we thought at the time? At the time I thought it was a good idea to draft Mike Williams 3rd overall. When that became a failure I wanted people held accountable, not because I knew all along, but because it's their job to get it right regardless of what I think. It's a results-based business.

 

Absolutely people should be held accountable and in this case Wanny and his boss were held accountable.

 

No one is disputing that.

[Orton's Arm]

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.

 

San Jose Bills Fan is one of the most intelligent and logical posters here. The same could be said of you, and I wish the two of you wouldn't quarrel.

 

San Jose Bills Fan believes--correctly--that every decision should be made on the basis of information available at the time. Suppose you're considering how to invest $1000. Option A has a 90% chance to grow to 10X your investment, and a 10% chance to fall to zero. Option B has a 10% chance to grow to 10X, and a 90% to fall to zero. Based on the information available at the time, Option A is the better of the two choices. It would be a mistake for anyone to try to use 20/20 hindsight to try to argue that B was equal to or better than A.

 

When a decision works out poorly, it's reasonable to ask whether there had been information available at the time which could have served as a warning. Maybe the person in charge thought that Option A had a 90% chance of succeeding, when the reality was only a 15% chance. When that's the case, it's good to look back on where one went wrong in the evaluation process, to avoid a repeat of such mistakes.

 

My own thought was that Wannestedt was going to be solid but not brilliant as a defensive coordinator. I was wrong: he had all the solidity of a piece of cotton candy. My guess is that if I'd dug deeply into his work as defensive coordinator, I would have encountered warning signs. Indications he was not nearly as "solid" as my surface examination of his work might seem to indicate. I think that's what your arguing as well: that the warning signs for Wannestedt were there; visible to those prepared to do the work necessary to find them.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Thank you very much, EA.

 

Coming from you that is very high praise.

 

The conversation was routed to PM and after some continued discussion olive branches were extended and accepted although I'm still writing the final draft of my apology.

 

Right from the start this whole topic was messed up for the very same reasons you mention above, a lot of great posters at odds.

 

Anyways Sisyphus and I have gotten into it before and it's great for the board that as a moderator and frequent poster, besides being knowledgable he is neither vindictive nor a grudge holder.

[Orton's Arm]

Thank you very much, EA.

 

Coming from you that is very high praise.

 

The conversation was routed to PM and after some continued discussion olive branches were extended and accepted although I'm still writing the final draft of my apology.

 

Right from the start this whole topic was messed up for the very same reasons you mention above, a lot of great posters at odds.

 

Anyways Sisyphus and I have gotten into it before and it's great for the board that as a moderator and frequent poster, besides being knowledgable he is neither vindictive nor a grudge holder.

 

All's well that ends well. I'm glad to hear that two posters, both of whom I think highly of, are now on good terms.

[Mr. WEO]

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.

 

 

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.

 

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.

 

 

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?

 

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.

 

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?

 

San Jose Bills Fan believes--correctly--that every decision should be made on the basis of information available at the time. When a decision works out poorly, it's reasonable to ask whether there had been information available at the time which could have served as a warning.

 

The logic being used to argue that it could not be foreseen that Wanny woould be no better than Edwards bends the mind.

 

Everyone agrees that Wanny was brough in solely to help the hopeless Edwards run the defense. He had all that experience and success! So he comes in, devotes a year to improving the D......and the D is still terrible, despite his help and his previous success and his experience.

 

Yet the above posters see it as logical to promote the guy to DC? This makes absolutely no sense. None. And then the same posters say it simply could not be predicted at the time that Wanny is actually not a good defensive coach. Of course, it was completely predictable (and was predicted by more than a few for this exact and obvious reason) after the defense got no better under Wanny's "help".

 

The above posts represent revisionist history.

[Kelly the Dog]

The logic being used to argue that it could not be foreseen that Wanny woould be no better than Edwards bends the mind.

 

Everyone agrees that Wanny was brough in solely to help the hopeless Edwards run the defense. He had all that experience and success! So he comes in, devotes a year to improving the D......and the D is still terrible, despite his help and his previous success and his experience.

 

Yet the above posters see it as logical to promote the guy to DC? This makes absolutely no sense. None. And then the same posters say it simply could not be predicted at the time that Wanny is actually not a good defensive coach. Of course, it was completely predictable (and was predicted by more than a few for this exact and obvious reason) after the defense got no better under Wanny's "help".

 

The above posts represent revisionist history.

No, your post implies that Wanny had some huge sway on Edwards defense when he just didn't. He stayed away from having a huge influence pretty much on purpose and helped Chan out on a lot of different things, including offensive gameplans. He intentionally didn't try to step on Edwards toes and was at best a consultant, and half of a position coach. Chan brought Wanny in to give him a job and to lean on his experience on both sides of the ball because they were trusted friends who used to do the same thing when in Miami.

 

Very little if any of the Edwards defensive problems were due to Wanny outside of he would add his opinion to the game plan that Edwards was drawing up. There were rumors late in the season that Wanny was calling some plays but I heard that was unfounded. I don't know for sure. But it was Edwards scheme, Edwards putting players on the field, Edwards game plans, Edwards defensive play calling.

[eball]

The logic being used to argue that it could not be foreseen that Wanny woould be no better than Edwards bends the mind.

 

Everyone agrees that Wanny was brough in solely to help the hopeless Edwards run the defense. He had all that experience and success! So he comes in, devotes a year to improving the D......and the D is still terrible, despite his help and his previous success and his experience.

 

Yet the above posters see it as logical to promote the guy to DC? This makes absolutely no sense. None. And then the same posters say it simply could not be predicted at the time that Wanny is actually not a good defensive coach. Of course, it was completely predictable (and was predicted by more than a few for this exact and obvious reason) after the defense got no better under Wanny's "help".

 

The above posts represent revisionist history.

 

Why don't you simply type "it's all Buddy's fault" and then shut up? You've proven that's all you care about posting anyway.

[Mango]

Wanny was an enigma here in Buffalo. Obviously he did a poor to terrible job here, and deserved to be canned. What is weird is he was successful as a DC everywhere he went prior to Buffalo. I want to blame the guy, but as Bills fans are we looking at the roster through rose colored lenses, and it is really that bad. I prefer to blam Wanny, however his time here in Buffalo was puzzling.

[Kirby Jackson]

Wanny was an enigma here in Buffalo. Obviously he did a poor to terrible job here, and deserved to be canned. What is weird is he was successful as a DC everywhere he went prior to Buffalo. I want to blame the guy, but as Bills fans are we looking at the roster through rose colored lenses, and it is really that bad. I prefer to blam Wanny, however his time here in Buffalo was puzzling.

 

My simple explanation is that the game is much different than when he was successful. The spread offense is tough to beat rushing 4 and dropping 7 every time.

[Floridabillsfan1]

How exactly are they "bullshitting us"?

 

1) " We are building through the draft " - Levitre walks and Byrd was not signed last season to a extension.

2) " We need to pay our players that good and keep them on our team " - They pay Chris Kelsey and try to convince us they know something we don't .

3 ) " Fitzpatrick can win in this league as long as protect him " - They did protect him and he still lost as the fans knew he would .

 

Maybe bullshitting is not the best way to describe it ?

[Mr. WEO]

No, your post implies that Wanny had some huge sway on Edwards defense when he just didn't. He stayed away from having a huge influence pretty much on purpose and helped Chan out on a lot of different things, including offensive gameplans. He intentionally didn't try to step on Edwards toes and was at best a consultant, and half of a position coach. Chan brought Wanny in to give him a job and to lean on his experience on both sides of the ball because they were trusted friends who used to do the same thing when in Miami.

 

Very little if any of the Edwards defensive problems were due to Wanny outside of he would add his opinion to the game plan that Edwards was drawing up. There were rumors late in the season that Wanny was calling some plays but I heard that was unfounded. I don't know for sure. But it was Edwards scheme, Edwards putting players on the field, Edwards game plans, Edwards defensive play calling.

 

Why would you assume this is true?? There is no question that Dave Wannstedt appeared at OBD to help with the Defense. He wasn't brought in "to give him a job" or to help with the offensive gameplans. That's just silly. Chan had a quiet arrogance about the offense that clearly manifested itself in last year's bad play calling.

 

So you're saying that Chan never intended to do more than offer Edwards a few suggestions and help out as a position coach? And as the season went on, Chan never asked Wanny to take a bigger role in the defense because he didn't want him to "step on Edward's toes"?

 

That's as crazy as it sounds. Sorry, it's far easier to believe that Wanny had a huge hand in the 2011 D and that is why the 2012 D looked no better--or worse.

 

If you are clinging to the claim that there was no way to predict Wanny would fail as the DC in 2012, then I guess you have to keep repeating the above stuff.

 

 

 

 

Why don't you simply type "it's all Buddy's fault" and then shut up? You've proven that's all you care about posting anyway.

 

I did earlier. Why should I "shut up"? A discussion is ongoing about the predictablility of Wanny's bad coaching. In fact, you started this thread in order to divert heat away from the Nix is a moron posts popping up lately. Why else would you have spontaneously begun a "hey wannstedt was the real cause of all of our problems last year, right fellas?".......in April??

 

And what kind of a man tells another man to "shut up" in a discussion where everyone is being fairly passionate, but civil? I would never tell you to "shut up". In fact, I would encourage you to start as many threads as possible!

[Kelly the Dog]

1) " We are building through the draft " - Levitre walks and Byrd was not signed last season to a extension.

2) " We need to pay our players that good and keep them on our team " - They pay Chris Kelsey and try to convince us they know something we don't .

3 ) " Fitzpatrick can win in this league as long as protect him " - They did protect him and he still lost as the fans knew he would .

 

Maybe bullshitting is not the best way to describe it ?

No, it's not at all a good way to describe. I would bet anything they completely believed each of those quotes. They may have been totally wrong in retrospect, and may be incompetent fools, but they thoroughly believe all of them. They probably still believe the third one, and it's probably true, He just happened to play consistently crappy last year, and got crappy coaching, alongside some crappy WR, backed by a pitiful defense.

 

Why would you assume this is true?? There is no question that Dave Wannstedt appeared at OBD to help with the Defense. He wasn't brought in "to give him a job" or to help with the offensive gameplans. That's just silly. Chan had a quiet arrogance about the offense that clearly manifested itself in last year's bad play calling.

 

So you're saying that Chan never intended to do more than offer Edwards a few suggestions and help out as a position coach? And as the season went on, Chan never asked Wanny to take a bigger role in the defense because he didn't want him to "step on Edward's toes"?

 

That's as crazy as it sounds. Sorry, it's far easier to believe that Wanny had a huge hand in the 2011 D and that is why the 2012 D looked no better--or worse.

 

If you are clinging to the claim that there was no way to predict Wanny would fail as the DC in 2012, then I guess you have to keep repeating the above stuff.

I don't just assume it, I pay attention, I listen close, and I read a lot, and I talk to people who know stuff, and I think. Sorry if all that stuff is foreign to you.

 

Chan said it when he hired him that is what he was going to do. Chan and Nix repeatedly said this was Edwards defense. That's what Wanny repeatedly said himself.

[MRW]

The logic being used to argue that it could not be foreseen that Wanny woould be no better than Edwards bends the mind.

 

Everyone agrees that Wanny was brough in solely to help the hopeless Edwards run the defense. He had all that experience and success! So he comes in, devotes a year to improving the D......and the D is still terrible, despite his help and his previous success and his experience.

 

Yet the above posters see it as logical to promote the guy to DC? This makes absolutely no sense. None. And then the same posters say it simply could not be predicted at the time that Wanny is actually not a good defensive coach. Of course, it was completely predictable (and was predicted by more than a few for this exact and obvious reason) after the defense got no better under Wanny's "help".

 

The above posts represent revisionist history.

My post meant exactly what it said, no more and no less. I didn't say a single thing about whether it was "logical" to promote Wannstedt, I was addressing your statement that it was Nix's call. I don't think it was, I think the extent of his involvement was to (possibly) suggest to Gailey that his initial pick for DC was in over his head.

 

Again, Nix has responsibility for the overall performance of the coaching staff. Gailey was a failure, and that can be laid at Nix's feet. One of the reasons Gailey failed was having Edwards and then Wannstedt as his DC, but I don't think Nix is responsible for those particular bad decisions.

[Mr. WEO]

No, it's not at all a good way to describe. I would bet anything they completely believed each of those quotes. They may have been totally wrong in retrospect, and may be incompetent fools, but they thoroughly believe all of them. They probably still believe the third one, and it's probably true, He just happened to play consistently crappy last year, and got crappy coaching, alongside some crappy WR, backed by a pitiful defense.

 

 

I don't just assume it, I pay attention, I listen close, and I read a lot, and I talk to people who know stuff, and I think. Sorry if all that stuff is foreign to you.

 

Chan said it when he hired him that is what he was going to do. Chan and Nix repeatedly said this was Edwards defense. That's what Wanny repeatedly said himself.

 

Oh please!

 

Anyway, if you were half the thinker you boast of being, you would not expect anyone in the organization to publicly say that the reason they brought in Wanny (out of the blue) was because the DC the HC and the GM had just picked 2 seasons prior was floundering. No, now that I think of it, I guess Chan just woke up one day, realized he needed an "Assistant HC" at the same time he was wondering how he could help his old friend Dave Wannstedt.

 

Nah....

 

Like many others here (based on the overwhelming sentiment posted on the threads at the time of his hiring), I made the straightforward assumption that Wanny was brought here to fix George and his defense (as tenderly and respectfully as possible, if you prefer). And like some here, I called the failure that was to come with Wanny as DC. It just wasn't that hard. If you really didn't see it coming, then certanly an old NFL pro like Buddy should have figured this one out.

 

My post meant exactly what it said, no more and no less. I didn't say a single thing about whether it was "logical" to promote Wannstedt, I was addressing your statement that it was Nix's call. I don't think it was, I think the extent of his involvement was to (possibly) suggest to Gailey that his initial pick for DC was in over his head.

 

Again, Nix has responsibility for the overall performance of the coaching staff. Gailey was a failure, and that can be laid at Nix's feet. One of the reasons Gailey failed was having Edwards and then Wannstedt as his DC, but I don't think Nix is responsible for those particular bad decisions.

 

Edwards is on Gailey. But after completely whiffing on him as DC, and then convincing Nix to hire Wanny to help out on D, and then seeing the D tank yet again with Wanny on staff, doesn't Nix at some point in the 2011 sesason ask Chan what the heck is going on with the D? Or what the heck am I paying Wanny to do again? And after the awful D of the 2011 season comes to an end, and Chan comes to Buddy and says "I know how to fix this D (again)--the answer is we make Wanny DC!".....doesn't Buddy at least say..."huh?!".

Edited April 22, 2013 by Mr. WEO

[MRW]

Edwards is on Gailey. But after completely whiffing on him as DC, and then convincing Nix to hire Wanny to help out on D, and then seeing the D tank yet again with Wanny on staff, doesn't Nix at some point in the 2011 sesason ask Chan what the heck is going on with the D? Or whathte heck am I paying Wanny to do again? And after the awful D of the 2011 season comes to an end, and Chan coems to Buddy and says "I know how to fix this D (again)--the answer is we make Wanny DC!".....doesn't Buddy at least say..."huh?!".

It's perfectly fair to fault Nix for putting too much trust in Gailey's judgment. But honestly, I want the GM to let the HC make his choices for a staff. There's no doubt that Gailey was a bad choice for HC, which carried over into poor selections for coordinators, but I don't think the solution for that is for Nix to micromanage the assistant coaching staff.