Sisyphean Bills Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 It's a shame some don't understand the point of this thread and must continually throw blame at Buddy Nix. This defense has talent (Buddy's job, by the way). Before the season started last summer nearly everyone anticipated a defense that would rank in the top half of the league, statistically, and a few even dreamed higher, but those were not considered pipe dreams. The key to the season, everyone thought, would be whether Fitz's accuracy issues had been adequately addressed by David Lee. Wanny screwed the team with his vanilla schemes and uninspired leadership, and Gailey allowed it to happen. They're both gone. If Nix is to blame for hiring Gailey in the first place, fine, but let's go to the way-back machine and recall just how many candidates were clamoring for the job. Perhaps the thread title should not have been phrased as a question if your intent was to more emphatically cast the blame on Wannstedt and Gailey. The reality is that Nix was involved in the train wreck of last season. It is undeniable that he hired Gailey and supported promoting Wannstedt to defensive coordinator.
eball Posted April 18, 2013 Author Posted April 18, 2013 Perhaps the thread title should not have been phrased as a question if your intent was to more emphatically cast the blame on Wannstedt and Gailey. The reality is that Nix was involved in the train wreck of last season. It is undeniable that he hired Gailey and supported promoting Wannstedt to defensive coordinator. It's a common flaw of mine to expect too much rational thinking from posters in this community.
The Big Cat Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Perhaps the thread title should not have been phrased as a question if your intent was to more emphatically cast the blame on Wannstedt and Gailey. The reality is that Nix was involved in the train wreck of last season. It is undeniable that he hired Gailey and supported promoting Wannstedt to defensive coordinator. But putting the onus on Nix for Wanny's ineptitude is expecting a certain level of micromanagement from our GM. Obviously Wanny did something at some time to make the FO (and a lot of posters here, too (not that it matters)) believe he could competently do his job. Personally, by week 4, the coaching from the booth **** had me throwing my beer at the TV screen.
thurst44 Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 The more I hear out of defensive players as they're around the new staff, the angrier I become at Wannstedt for his unemotional and uninspired tenure as the Bills' DC. Say what you want about Gailey's playcalling and Fitz's inconsistency, but nobody did more to screw the Bills' chance at a good season than Wanny. The Buffalo News article on Bradham this morning is just the latest example of the changed atmosphere and intensity around the team. I hear many of you whining about lack of talent, but coaching DOES matter. It's funny...top-to-bottom, it feels like every player on the defense (save maybe Carrington and Byrd, and Gilmore was solid as a rook) declined from 2011 to 2012. Whether it's Aaron Williams and Dareus falling way back, Kyle Williams having his worst season (if still pro bowl), or George Wilson and Nick Barnett falling off a cliff, it seems to much of a thread to dismiss. And paired with the strategic signings and Pettine's abundance of top-ten defenses with a team whose talent was not significantly better, this non-coincidence gives me hope the Bills will surprise some people with a borderline-dominant defense.
Kirby Jackson Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 I read the title as Wanny being the most inept. I agree with that. He was worse at his job than Buddy or Chan were at theirs. He had some talent and failed.
PromoTheRobot Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) While there are usually plenty who love or hate any move the Bills make, I'm quite certain there was more love for the Wannstadt hire than hate. After all he was an experienced DC with a ring. EXACTLY what everyone here said we needed after a complete unknown like George Edwards. PTR Edited April 18, 2013 by PromoTheRobot
K-9 Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Even if we are to believe everything you wrote, Wanny's answer was to further expose them by failing to disguise schemes or create anything unique to confuse offenses? Please. The guy screwed the pooch and stole Ralph's money. If you need to believe it wasn't the players, so be it. But when players consistently miss plays they are in position to make, that's on the players. When your players are getting beat one on one at the POA, that's not the scheme. When players can't execute basic defensive schemes, no amount of "disguising" them and making things more complicated as a result, is going to work. It was interesting to see Wanny actually dumb it down as the season progressed. That's what coaches have to do in order to simplify things for players that can't handle their assignments. Not that it mattered. GO BILLS!!!
Kirby Jackson Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 If you need to believe it wasn't the players, so be it. But when players consistently miss plays they are in position to make, that's on the players. When your players are getting beat one on one at the POA, that's not the scheme. When players can't execute basic defensive schemes, no amount of "disguising" them and making things more complicated as a result, is going to work. It was interesting to see Wanny actually dumb it down as the season progressed. That's what coaches have to do in order to simplify things for players that can't handle their assignments. Not that it mattered. GO BILLS!!! I disagree with your basic premise; they were not put in a position to succeed. It is like giving someone a head start in a race and then losing. You can say that you were not fast enough but in reality it is not easy when someone else has a head start. That is what he did with his 1992 vanilla 4-3. The game preparation has evolved way too much for that.
eball Posted April 18, 2013 Author Posted April 18, 2013 While there are usually who love or hate any move the Bills make, I'm quite certain there was more love for the Wannstadt hire than hate. After all he was an experienced DC with a ring. EXACTLY what everyone here said we needed after a complete unknown like George Edwards. PTR That is exactly right -- I was admittedly one of those leading the charge that Wanny was going to wreak havoc with this defense. Little did I know it would be the wrong type of havoc. He sucked, and deserves every bit of vitriol thrown his way by Bills fans.
T master Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 The more I hear out of defensive players as they're around the new staff, the angrier I become at Wannstedt for his unemotional and uninspired tenure as the Bills' DC. Say what you want about Gailey's playcalling and Fitz's inconsistency, but nobody did more to screw the Bills' chance at a good season than Wanny. The Buffalo News article on Bradham this morning is just the latest example of the changed atmosphere and intensity around the team. I hear many of you whining about lack of talent, but coaching DOES matter. I read an article about Bradham & how he was playing Strong side & his entire career played weak side & Barnett played weak side when he was always a middle LB . Talk about trying to put a square peg in a round whole no wonder our LB's sucked last year . Coaching is realizing the players you have & putting them in the best position to be productive with in the scheme & Wanny didn't have a clue !!!!
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Shortly after Pettine was hired, he said that if the opposing offense knows what the defense is gonna do pre-snap, there is zero chance of stopping them, regardless of the talent on that defense. That was Wanny... Last year the whole D game plan was as follows 1. assemble a D line that looked good on paper. 2. (no further steps) He was outschemed constantly. It's a chess match and unfortunately Wannstedt didn't know how to play. Or to paraphrase one of our esteemed posters, Wanny was playing checkers when the OC was playing chess. We'd all like to believe that it's not the players and that another coach would have gotten far better results, but that ain't reality. Our players, particularly our LB group and SS play, were horrendous and they SEVERELY limited what little scheme flexibility Wanny had to begin with. The film doesn't lie. When you see players who are IN good positions to make plays and STILL can't make them, it's the players, not the scheme. When you boil it down, football is about beating the man in front of you. If you can't, you get your ass handed to you more often than not. And there is nothing ANY coach can do about that except replace the players. The idea that Wilson, Barnett, A Williams, K Moore, etc. would have been better FOOTBALL PLAYERS if only coached by somebody else just doesn't hold water given how often they were manhandled and beaten. GO BILLS!!! Hate to disagree with you K-9 but I disagree. Wanny is the perfect case study of the coach who makes his players worse and places them in a position to fail, thus destroying any shed of hope, belief, and confidence. The Wanny case study shows that: 1) Coaching IS as important as talent. 2) The efforts of even the most highly-motivated professional athletes can be undermined by hopelessness. Dom Capers, Wade Phillips, and Buddy Ryan didn't spend exhaustive hours creating complex defenses because they thought that talent wins football games.
QCity Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 It's a shame some don't understand the point of this thread and must continually throw blame at Buddy Nix. This defense has talent (Buddy's job, by the way). Before the season started last summer nearly everyone anticipated a defense that would rank in the top half of the league, statistically, and a few even dreamed higher, but those were not considered pipe dreams. The key to the season, everyone thought, would be whether Fitz's accuracy issues had been adequately addressed by David Lee. Wanny screwed the team with his vanilla schemes and uninspired leadership, and Gailey allowed it to happen. They're both gone. If Nix is to blame for hiring Gailey in the first place, fine, but let's go to the way-back machine and recall just how many candidates were clamoring for the job. Buddy Nix is also responsible for the failed Peace Bridge proposal, the Sabres lackluster season, and famine in Africa.
Leelee Phoenix Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Some of the blame has to go to Nix, just for hiring a grossly unqualified candidate like Gailey. The warning signs were there before last season, with whatever the defensive plan was in 2010 which ended up virtually wasting an entire draft, and a HC that admits to not planning the defense. I can't believe NIx still has his job. He's so embarrassing.
eball Posted April 18, 2013 Author Posted April 18, 2013 Some of the blame has to go to Nix, just for hiring a grossly unqualified candidate like Gailey. The warning signs were there before last season, with whatever the defensive plan was in 2010 which ended up virtually wasting an entire draft, and a HC that admits to not planning the defense. I can't believe NIx still has his job. He's so embarrassing. You missed. The. Point.
Mr. WEO Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 It's a shame some don't understand the point of this thread and must continually throw blame at Buddy Nix. This defense has talent (Buddy's job, by the way). Before the season started last summer nearly everyone anticipated a defense that would rank in the top half of the league, statistically, and a few even dreamed higher, but those were not considered pipe dreams. The key to the season, everyone thought, would be whether Fitz's accuracy issues had been adequately addressed by David Lee. Wanny screwed the team with his vanilla schemes and uninspired leadership, and Gailey allowed it to happen. They're both gone. If Nix is to blame for hiring Gailey in the first place, fine, but let's go to the way-back machine and recall just how many candidates were clamoring for the job. Really? We had one decent LB last year and he was released. Now many are in agreement that in Buddy's 4th draft, he must draft LBs because of the 3 year drought at that position (despite his second tier FA pickup and "Bradham looked pretty good last year"). His second round CB from 2 years ago is so bad, he's being switched to safety (where he is no more likely to shine, the hope of all fans notwithstanding). McK has proven over several years that he isn't a solid starting CB, yet he will be promoted to starter by a 4th DC. Anderson may or may not be any good anymore. Dareus may or may not ever recover from the psychic trauma that lef him a mediocre player last year. Mario may or may not play a full season like guy who has NOT yet been handed a 50 million check. Look, I blame Chan for many things, but to absolve Buddy for the Wanny job is reveionist history, and ridiculous. First Chan suggests they bring a total nobody in George Edwards as DC. Buddy apparently doesn't ask why GE is the right guy to install a new 3-4. A year later, Chan said let's bring Wanny in as "asst HC". Everyone here assumed that meant Wanny would be the Bills "shadow DC" for the hapless Edwards. Yet when the defense (with Wanny on board) sucked again in 2011, Nix fired his puppet DC and replaced him with.......Wanny! Completely predictable failure ensues. I won't even go into Buddy's philosphy that it's OK not to have a real OC for 3 seasons. Or that he couldn't figure out that he needed to draft a QB other than Levi Brown. How does a GM never question the poor results of the HC's job year after year? Who's in charge? He's a bumbler. Simply put, there is no team bu the Bills who would still have this guy on the payroll.
The Big Cat Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Really? We had one decent LB last year and he was released. Now many are in agreement that in Buddy's 4th draft, he must draft LBs because of the 3 year drought at that position (despite his second tier FA pickup and "Bradham looked pretty good last year"). His second round CB from 2 years ago is so bad, he's being switched to safety (where he is no more likely to shine, the hope of all fans notwithstanding). McK has proven over several years that he isn't a solid starting CB, yet he will be promoted to starter by a 4th DC. Anderson may or may not be any good anymore. Dareus may or may not ever recover from the psychic trauma that lef him a mediocre player last year. Mario may or may not play a full season like guy who has NOT yet been handed a 50 million check. Look, I blame Chan for many things, but to absolve Buddy for the Wanny job is reveionist history, and ridiculous. First Chan suggests they bring a total nobody in George Edwards as DC. Buddy apparently doesn't ask why GE is the right guy to install a new 3-4. A year later, Chan said let's bring Wanny in as "asst HC". Everyone here assumed that meant Wanny would be the Bills "shadow DC" for the hapless Edwards. Yet when the defense (with Wanny on board) sucked again in 2011, Nix fired his puppet DC and replaced him with.......Wanny! Completely predictable failure ensues. I won't even go into Buddy's philosphy that it's OK not to have a real OC for 3 seasons. Or that he couldn't figure out that he needed to draft a QB other than Levi Brown. How does a GM never question the poor results of the HC's job year after year? Who's in charge? He's a bumbler. Simply put, there is no team bu the Bills who would still have this guy on the payroll. I only read the first sentence. But if you believe Barnett was 'decent' than you're fully on board with eBall's summation that Wanny destroyed his players. If Barnett was a 'decent' player, than how do you explain him being the culprit in 80-90% of big plays surrendered last year?
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 But putting the onus on Nix for Wanny's ineptitude is expecting a certain level of micromanagement from our GM. Obviously Wanny did something at some time to make the FO (and a lot of posters here, too (not that it matters)) believe he could competently do his job. Personally, by week 4, the coaching from the booth **** had me throwing my beer at the TV screen. That's not a bad point. On the other hand, as GM he could've stepped in early in the process and just told Gailey, "You know what Chan, I've really thought about it and we're not going to go down this road with Dave." If you think about it, if Nix had stuck to his plan to convert to a 3-4, then Wannstedt doesn't get the job, Gailey might have redeemed himself, and Nix saves himself from the public ridicule he is now receiving. While there are usually plenty who love or hate any move the Bills make, I'm quite certain there was more love for the Wannstadt hire than hate. After all he was an experienced DC with a ring. EXACTLY what everyone here said we needed after a complete unknown like George Edwards. PTR Definitely, PTR. Some posters were guaranteeing that Wanny would have the defense in the top 10, if not the top 5. Looking at how the linebackers had regressed the year before did not resonate a collective skepticism apparently.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Nix's responsibility in the Wannstedt caper is easily summed up as it's already been covered here. On the negative hand, by hiring Gailey and giving him carte blanche to hire his own staff, Nix abdicated his responsibility as GM. On the positive hand, by allowing Gailey carte blanche to hire his own staff, Nix avoided micromanaging and gave Gailey full power to succeed or fail based on his own decisions. Either view has validity IMO.
Lurker Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Perhaps the thread title should not have been phrased as a question if your intent was to more emphatically cast the blame on Wannstedt and Gailey. The reality is that Nix was involved in the train wreck of last season. It is undeniable that he hired Gailey and supported promoting Wannstedt to defensive coordinator. And yet...show of hands. How many TSW "experts" were excited to have Wanny take over the DC role last spring? How much of the 20-20 hindsight in this thread would posters be willing to share if SDS had an easy-to-look-up archive system on the Wall that would present that kind of "don't look at what I said then, look at what I'm saying now" commentary? It's maddening (or Madden, as well) to read the "this [insert FO person name] is inept" posts time and again when the majority of TSW posters were on board with many of the personnel and coaching decisions at the time they took place (i.e., real time, not after the fact). Have the Bills failed yet again. Yes, undoubtedly. But the "I'm quite when things are going well, but know more than the front office fools when their not" attitude on this, or any MB, gets to be a real drag and adds nothing to the discussion...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Nix's responsibility in the Wannstedt caper is easily summed up as it's already been covered here. On the negative hand, by hiring Gailey and giving him carte blanche to hire his own staff, Nix abdicated his responsibility as GM. On the positive hand, by allowing Gailey carte blanche to hire his own staff, Nix avoided micromanaging and gave Gailey full power to succeed or fail based on his own decisions. Either view has validity IMO. Ultimately, Wanny failed and Gailey was fired so in that context, Buddy deserves some blame in the form of ultimate responsibility. But I understand his decisions prior to Gailey/Wanny failing. Ultimately the proof (justification of argument) is in the pudding.
Recommended Posts