Kelly the Dog Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 http://sports.espn.g...=bayless/041112 Seems like this article (from 2004) may be in order again. http://articles.sun-...er-bowl-winning Yeah that team was stacked on defense, too. Not. LDE Alonzo Spellman 24 3 16 8.5 sacks, 0 interceptions, 1 fumble recovered LDT Jim Flanigan 24 1 12 11.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 1 fumble recovered RDT Chris Zorich 26 4 15 1.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 2 fumbles recovered RDE John Thierry 24 1 7 4.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 4 fumbles recovered LLB Vinson Smith 30 7 13 4.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 1 fumble recovered MLB Joe Cain 30 6 16 RLB Ron Cox 27 5 13 0.0 sacks, 1 interception, 0 fumbles recovered LCB Donnell Woolford 29 6 9 0.0 sacks, 4 interceptions, 0 fumbles recovered RCB Jeremy Lincoln 26 2 14 1.0 sacks, 1 interception, 0 fumbles recovered SS Marty Carter 26 4 16 0.0 sacks, 2 interceptions, 1 fumble recovered FS Mark A. Carrier 27 5 15 0.0 sacks, 0 interceptions, 1 fumble recovered What the heck did you expect him to say? What he said is the same scripted pabulum that every new coaching hire says. ] Do you think there was a chance in hell he would have come to the Bills a year ago before we had Mario, Anderson, and Gilmore? Not a chance, IMO.
billstolast Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 I still think nix has to go...but getting rid of wannabestad, fitz and gailey made us better
K-9 Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 And you know this, how? Pettine had decided to leave after the season before the season was over. The Bills situation was attractive to him on many levels, not the least of which was having Mario, Dareus, Kyle, Mark Anderson, Byrd and Gilmore on the roster. That was very likely the biggest factor. I'm sure Marrone, Hackett, Whaley and even Brandon were an attractive proposition, too. Young aggressive/progressive guys. As well as Buffalo being a northeast blue collar football town like he is a product of. Just as I suspected. Not a linebacker, SS, or #2 CB in the bunch. Marke Anderson is a stretch, IMO. But I'll give him a pass due to injury. GO BILLS!!!
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 He would have been the most sought after DC out there as a strict DC, or one of the very top for sure. He was easily going to get a job. It was only a matter of where. Of course. I agree with every bit of that. But to me, and from what Pettine said when he was hired, the Bills were a perfect opportunity because of three separate distinct things, all of which the BIlls offered--which were good players on defense, young aggressive coaches and organization he got along with and liked where they were going, and the fact Pettine is an old school football guy from a small town 30 miles from Philly, and football crazed Buffalo was attractive to him. he would have had several offers. I think Mario Williams and a couple other guys were the biggest of the three reasons. I highly doubt if it were last year (which would have been before they signed Mario and Anderson and drafted Gilmore) that he would have thought it was nearly as an attractive opportunity and signed right away. He would have considered a bunch of teams. And, I disagree with your assessment. I think Pettine came here to work with Marrone, first and foremost. It was a chance to leave a ship that was getting scuttled, a chance to build his own defense the way he wants, and a chance to work with a coach that he probably hit it off with. I think your glasses may be tinted a little with that #1 overall pedigree. Remember coaches may watch the same film and do not have to agree. This is the same guy that Wade Phillips and the Texans let walk and the guy that Dave Wannstedt (working in the thread topic , the guy that boned the Bills last year) absolutely had to have to run his defense through. Yeah that team was stacked on defense, too. Not. The irony is undiminished though. Wannstedt was the HC and effective GM that built that "stacked" unit.
eball Posted April 23, 2013 Author Posted April 23, 2013 Let me state up front and very bluntly that I have little regard for Nix as a GM. He selected the prior HC, been involved in three very average drafts and was most responsible for putting together this roster. His record is a dismal 16-32. During his stewardship his team has been nearly incapable of beating any team with a winning record. When the Bills played two superior teams last year, Seahawks and 49ers, they were demolished. It was a contest of men against prebuescent boys. It was embarrassing. In three years this clueless GM made little attempt to address the qb position, the most important position in the game. He passed on good quality qb prospects for other very average prospects. His lassitude in finding a real qb bordered on malfeasance and nonfeasance. Making a defense for a GM using the argument that everything he has done has not gone wrong is not a ringing endorsement of his record. The bottom line is the bottom line i.e. the record. It is dismal. There is still a long way to go to get to the point of respectability. Even if Nix has a magnificent draft and even if he does a masterful job in acquiring good value free agents this offseason he has set this franchise back by not acting smartly in his first three years to establish a solid foundation to build on. John, I fully understand your perspective and I don't claim to "endorse" Nix -- what I've said, primarily, is that (a) he's not a buffoon and (b) I think he's probably middle of the pack when the transactions he has overseen are viewed as a whole. There's no denying (in my opinion) that with some decent coaching last season this team could have actually been in the playoffs. There are players on that roster with talent -- Nix hasn't whiffed on everything he has done. I admit the failure to address QB has been huge, and in retrospect Gailey just wasn't prepared to be an NFL head coach in this day and age. But last season, look no further than Wannstedt's incompetence as the primary reason behind the Bills' latest collapse.
Mr. WEO Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 You're neither passionate nor civil. You pick fights and then can't back up your assertions. I've attempted in threads past to engage you "civilly" and you can't help yourself. You question why I started this thread now? Perhaps because upon reflection, I became livid thinking about the players on that defense and how outright putrid they were last year, with a DC who did NOTHING to try and change things up. The Bills have gone defense heavy the past three drafts, and Pettine certainly saw the cupboard being full enough to think this is where he can make some hay. You don't understand my perspective because you are on one track only -- Buddy is a buffoon and responsible for everything wrong with the Bills. Go stuff a sock in it. Lol--when in this discussion have I been "uncivil"? You have told me to "shut up" and "stuff a sock in it". That passes for passion, I guess. You, on the other hand, typically attack the responder personally when your posts are rebutted. That's civil. It's also the white flag of any debate. Pick fights? You started this thread (because on April 18th you suddenly became livid about the defense from the 2012 season! That's credible.). I have responded. Can't back up my assertions? I asserted that I thought the Wanny promotion was foolish and a predictable failure. I said the same thing at the time he was promoted. I gave the reasons why this to me made no logical sense. History has proven this to be the correct view. What am I not backing up? http://sports.espn.g...=bayless/041112 Seems like this article (from 2004) may be in order again. http://articles.sun-...er-bowl-winning Who expects a GM to read an article?! Wanny is proof positive that the NFL is a good ol' boys network at heart. GMs make decisions based on who they know, not what they know. Look at nearly every coach who has moved on from Belichick's patriots. Failures. The correct yardstick for Wanny is not how well or badly he may have performed in the role of defensive advisor back in 2011. It's how well he did as defensive coordinator in his various stints around the league. If you have superior athletes, you can mask the flaws of a simple and unimaginative scheme. That's why Wannestedt enjoyed success in Dallas. To evaluate his performance as a defensive coordinator, you'd need to dig deeper than defensive stats. You'd need to watch a lot of film, while critically evaluating the level of creativity, mental flexibility, ingenuity, and competence that his play calling seemed to reveal. Or you could read a single, old Skip Bayless article!
JohnC Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 John, I fully understand your perspective and I don't claim to "endorse" Nix -- what I've said, primarily, is that (a) he's not a buffoon and (b) I think he's probably middle of the pack when the transactions he has overseen are viewed as a whole. There's no denying (in my opinion) that with some decent coaching last season this team could have actually been in the playoffs. There are players on that roster with talent -- Nix hasn't whiffed on everything he has done. I admit the failure to address QB has been huge, and in retrospect Gailey just wasn't prepared to be an NFL head coach in this day and age. But last season, look no further than Wannstedt's incompetence as the primary reason behind the Bills' latest collapse. I don't want to belabor my criticism of Nix (I'm sure it gets tiresome to read) but if Gailey and his selected staff were so lacking then ask yourself who hired Gailey? If Fitz is so inadequate then who signed him to a relatively rich contract extension? I have never made the cliam that as you put it "Nix hasn't whiffted on everything he has done" (your words). But I have made the point that if your GM is mediocre and he is competing against astute GMs such as Newsome, Colbert, Thompson etc you will never be a seriously contending team. Compare Nix to Ozzie Newsome? Does Nix have the wherewithal to match him or come close to matching him? There is nothing wrong or unfair in holding people accountable for their performances. In sports taking the measure is more simple than other fields of endeavor. It's about the record. When totalling the wins and losses excuses are not factored into the calculations. What infuriates me to no end is the wasted years of the Levy/Brandon/Nix stewardship of this team. Instead of building a solid foundation to build a team on we have to keep repeating the crazy cycle of redoing what we have already done, again and again. It's the same old cycle of futility.
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 John, I fully understand your perspective and I don't claim to "endorse" Nix -- what I've said, primarily, is that (a) he's not a buffoon and (b) I think he's probably middle of the pack when the transactions he has overseen are viewed as a whole. There's no denying (in my opinion) that with some decent coaching last season this team could have actually been in the playoffs. There are players on that roster with talent -- Nix hasn't whiffed on everything he has done. I admit the failure to address QB has been huge, and in retrospect Gailey just wasn't prepared to be an NFL head coach in this day and age. But last season, look no further than Wannstedt's incompetence as the primary reason behind the Bills' latest collapse. To be middle of the pack, he has to be better than, say, 10-12 other NFL GMs. Can you support that claim with arguments? Scott Pioli's work in Kansas City was pretty much a disaster as mentioned earlier in the thread, but even Scott Pioli was the GM of a playoff team. It's standard procedure to put the blame on the guys that just got fired in Buffalo. Scapegoating. The trouble is that no matter how many coaches get blamed and fired, the results on the field continue to be about the same. This might suggest that the problems run deeper than the coaches.
JohnC Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 Do you think there was a chance in hell he would have come to the Bills a year ago before we had Mario, Anderson, and Gilmore? Not a chance, IMO. What made the Bills an appealing job this offseason for Pettine was that he didn't have a job. He took the first job offer that became available after he became unemployed. He certainly wouldn't have givenup his Jets' job the prior year for a job to work with Chan. I respectfully disagree with your position that what made the Bills' job appealing was the talent level on one of the worst ranked defenses in the league. There is no doubt that a lack of good coaching was a factor in its poor performance but the main contributor to its poor showing was the lack of talent on the defense. Yout threw me off balance when you mentioned the underperforming Anderson as a player that appealed to him. Our views on this subjective matter are irreconcilable. We simply disagree. No big deal.
chris heff Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 Let me clear this up once and for all. Wannstedt was awful that defense was from 1989. But Gailey hired Wannstedt and Nix hired Gailey. So who hired Nix? Oh that's right. I am an eternal optimist especially when it comes to the Bills. I hope that Ralph turning control over to Russ will make a difference. I can't remember what year it was, it was when Mularkey was the HC, the Bills blew a big lead against Miami. Walking out of the game I told my nephew that nothing will change until ownership changes. Sadly in my more lucid moments I still believe this.
JohnC Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 To be middle of the pack, he has to be better than, say, 10-12 other NFL GMs. Can you support that claim with arguments? Scott Pioli's work in Kansas City was pretty much a disaster as mentioned earlier in the thread, but even Scott Pioli was the GM of a playoff team. It's standard procedure to put the blame on the guys that just got fired in Buffalo. Scapegoating. The trouble is that no matter how many coaches get blamed and fired, the results on the field continue to be about the same. This might suggest that the problems run deeper than the coaches. Arguing whether a GM is in the middle of the pack or near the bottom is wasted energy. Either way your team goes nowhere. It is like having a franchise qb who is average or less. It doesn't really matter because you don't get anywhere meaningful with that type of talent level. Nix's body of work is on display. There is more than enough material to make a fair judgment. For me the evaluation is simple. I will simply refer you to the record.
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 Arguing whether a GM is in the middle of the pack or near the bottom is wasted energy. Either way your team goes nowhere. It is like having a franchise qb who is average or less. It doesn't really matter because you don't get anywhere meaningful with that type of talent level. Nix's body of work is on display. There is more than enough material to make a fair judgment. For me the evaluation is simple. I will simply refer you to the record. Yes, I agree. Even if a logical set of arguments could be put together to convince people Nix was, say, the 21st best GM in the NFL (and that's not saying he is), you are absolutely correct that having a mediocre GM is not good enough. On the other hand, simply avoiding obvious blunders at every turn doesn't really make someone even so much as average at one's job.
eball Posted April 23, 2013 Author Posted April 23, 2013 I'm not responding specifically to a particular JohnC or Sisyphean post, but just in general as you both are making similar points/arguments. #1 -- I am not endorsing Buddy Nix as having done a "good" job so far in Buffalo #2 -- Buddy is ultimately responsible as the GM for the talent level of the roster #3 -- W/L record is one indicator of roster talent, but it is not the be-all end-all (i.e., coaching matters) #4 -- The offense coached by Gailey was competent enough to score points and win ballgames, despite Fitz's inconsistencies #5 -- Last season Dave Wannstedt did perhaps the worst coaching job on one side of the ball I have ever witnessed Go Bills!
Kelly the Dog Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 Yes, I agree. Even if a logical set of arguments could be put together to convince people Nix was, say, the 21st best GM in the NFL (and that's not saying he is), you are absolutely correct that having a mediocre GM is not good enough. On the other hand, simply avoiding obvious blunders at every turn doesn't really make someone even so much as average at one's job. Nix has failed so far. And he is paying for it with a likely early retirement sometime this year. I wish he was gone now. I only object to the fact that he was a total incompetent fool. I also think that Gailey was likely his 4th or 5th choice and he settled because at that time no one wanted to come to the Bills because we had a crappy roster. He didnt want Gailey, he settled for him. He went after a couple and even had the money and they shot us down. One of them, Cowher, was the big advocate for Gailey and one of the main reasons Nix hired him. For the record, I hated the Gailey hire at the time, I warmed to him after awhile (although I always hated George Edwards) and then he lost me all of last year. Marrone seems good, and Marrone hiring Pettine seems very good.
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 Nix has failed so far. And he is paying for it with a likely early retirement sometime this year. I wish he was gone now. I only object to the fact that he was a total incompetent fool. I also think that Gailey was likely his 4th or 5th choice and he settled because at that time no one wanted to come to the Bills because we had a crappy roster. He didnt want Gailey, he settled for him. He went after a couple and even had the money and they shot us down. One of them, Cowher, was the big advocate for Gailey and one of the main reasons Nix hired him. For the record, I hated the Gailey hire at the time, I warmed to him after awhile (although I always hated George Edwards) and then he lost me all of last year. Marrone seems good, and Marrone hiring Pettine seems very good. We'll never agree on the aspect of perceived roster quality determining who wants what job. I can tell you that Pete Carroll did not take the Seahawks job based on the players on the roster Jim Mora, Jr. had. He hit the ground running and has thoroughly turned the roster over to build the sort of team that he wanted. Another example: Jeff Fisher did not take the St. Louis job and immediately start gutting the roster because he thought it was stacked with talent. The stability, structure, and commitment of the organization to sustainable success on the football field are far more important than which players may be on the roster for a year or 2 longer.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 We'll never agree on the aspect of perceived roster quality determining who wants what job. I can tell you that Pete Carroll did not take the Seahawks job based on the players on the roster Jim Mora, Jr. had. He hit the ground running and has thoroughly turned the roster over to build the sort of team that he wanted. Another example: Jeff Fisher did not take the St. Louis job and immediately start gutting the roster because he thought it was stacked with talent. The stability, structure, and commitment of the organization to sustainable success on the football field are far more important than which players may be on the roster for a year or 2 longer. The point is only that Nix was extremely hamstrung by the fact that he couldn't hire the coaches he wanted to hire. Part of that was the roster was bare. Part was no QB and star players. Part was lack of recent success. Part was Buffalo.
JohnC Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 (edited) . Marrone seems good, and Marrone hiring Pettine seems very good. Let me end my interminable responses on this topic on a somewhat positive note. I also like the Marrone and Pettine hire. The Hackett hiring is interesting but I am a tad bit queasy with his inexperience. The players cut from the roster were predictable and very justifiable. The free agent acquisitions are still in progress but I like the additions of Lawson and Branch with the expectation that there are still good value pickups to be made. A Dansby addition would be very helpful. In my opinion letting Levitre go because of his contract demands was the right thing to do. If the Bills come out of this draft with a franchise qb to groom (Barkley/Nassib /EJ Manuel/Wilson) then I will consider this franchise making progress. My major regret is that I would have preferred this GM to have exhibited the same urgency in his pursuit of a qb sooner rather than later. I may be over reading this offseason's transactiions but I get the sense that there is a more orderly and systemic approach to addressing the roster. Is that a sign that others in the organization are influencing what is going on? I hope so. Edited April 23, 2013 by JohnC
eball Posted April 23, 2013 Author Posted April 23, 2013 Let me end my interminably responses on this topic on a somewhat positive note. I also like the Marrone and Pettine hire. The Hackett hiring is interesting but I am a tad bit queasy with his inexperience. The players cut from the roster were predictable and very justifiable. The free agent acquisitions are still in progress but I like the additions of Lawson and Branch with the expectation that there are still good value pickups to be made. A Dansby addition would be very helpful. In my opinion letting Levitre go because of his contract demands was the right thing to do. If the Bills come out of this draft with a franchise qb to groom (Barkley/Nassib /EJ Manuel/Wilson) then I will consider this franchise making progress. My major regret is that I would have preferred this GM to have exhibited the same urgency in his pursuit of a qb sooner rather than later. I may be over reading this offseason's transactiions but I get the sense that there is a more orderly and systemic approach to addressing the roster. Is that a sign that others in the organization are influencing what is going on? I hope so. I agree and think we're seeing the difference between Buddy on his own, and Buddy being managed by Brandon.
FireChan Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 How hypocritical are some of the people is this thread? "Wanny wasted all of the talent we have on defense, we have all of these probowlers, and nix sucks for hiring him" Buddy is responsible for more than half of our "talented" defensive players. And you say he's a buffoon? What, did we just have these guys fall into our lap? Buddy may be too trusting, but he's a decent defensive evaluator. If you're going to say Wannstedt is responsible for our weak D and it's Buddy's fault for hiring W, don't ignore the fact the talent is here because of him.
Recommended Posts