offyourocker Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 This makes me mad every day i see this thread. Who is in for a billboard. I would spring some $
thewildrabbit Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 This thread is too long to look. But, has anyone reminded those saying that ST teams are not important how the Bills lost their last playoff appearance ? good point. The Music City Miracle, at this point I can only expect it will take something of that nature to get Crossman finally canned.
Direhard Fan Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Oh me Oh my What a few loses will do to stir up the masses. Morrone is a 1%er so lets fire the whole bunch and start over fresh for 2014. Sounds like the same plan we used for the last 14 years. We wouldn't have any comments at all if we were winning. What fun is that??
TC in St. Louis Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Has anybody verified that Crossman is being retained? I haven't read anything except right here.
Mr. WEO Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Oh me Oh my What a few loses will do to stir up the masses. Morrone is a 1%er so lets fire the whole bunch and start over fresh for 2014. Sounds like the same plan we used for the last 14 years. We wouldn't have any comments at all if we were winning. What fun is that?? No, the "same plan" would be keeping poor choices at least a year too long (Jauron, Gregg, Chan). And define "a few losses".
NoSaint Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 (edited) I think marrone must have meant depth guys that could double as special team aces-- like Easley this year it McIntyre in prior years. Not necessarily just getting a bunch of ST specialists. he definitely did - but i think the better answer would be to get a special teams ace at coach and hope he can turn our best backs, wrs, lbs, and safeties into aces as opposed to having our other coordinators try and turn special teams aces into better contributors on O or D. obviously ideal is finding a guy who is the top of the rankings on both columns, but realistically at some point you need to be able to lean on the special teams coordinator to get the most out of a rag tag crew of guys. he has not shown the ability to do that. others have. Has anybody verified that Crossman is being retained? I haven't read anything except right here. that we are about 10 days into the offseason, it seems like a pretty strong possibility even without a formal announcement that they are going to keep everything the same. Edited January 7, 2014 by NoSaint
YoloinOhio Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Has anybody verified that Crossman is being retained? I haven't read anything except right here. I have not seen anything either. maybe the bigger surprise in the OP is that WGR has retained Jeremy White.
MarkAF43 Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 so if this is truly official, the question remains to be seen if there is a member with the Buffalo media willing to put Marrone on the spot for holding people accountable and force him to give an answer as to why he is retaining a coach who obviously doesn't have the mind to coach ST in the NFL.
YoloinOhio Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 so if this is truly official, the question remains to be seen if there is a member with the Buffalo media willing to put Marrone on the spot for holding people accountable and force him to give an answer as to why he is retaining a coach who obviously doesn't have the mind to coach ST in the NFL. Tim Graham, you are up!
raj.thacker Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Coaches don't tackle, but they teach players how to tackle. Crossman needed to get crossed off the board.
SactoBillFan Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Has anybody verified that Crossman is being retained? I haven't read anything except right here. Other than what the OP said about hearing it on WGR me either. The only thing I heard was that everything was being evaluated. Still I won't lose any sleep if he stays another year.
BillsBytheBay Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 It's the players not the coach. The punters may have been the two worst in the league last year. Multiple missed tackles. How hard is it to coach stay in your lanes. There is no schemes in special teams anymore. The rules have taken them away. There is no overloads allowed. It is all on the players. Again the board is missing the point. Moorman sucks. Powell sucked. Most of the offensive line sucks. The linebackers suck. Graham sucks. Marrone's in game decisions suck. Kyle Williams' run defense sucks. Spiller's vision and durability suck. EJ's knees suck. Stevie's hands suck. Every TE on the roster sucks. And most of all the owner sucks. But instead focus the attention on a special teams coach... well.... This is the Crossman thread...... Isn't it? Or did I get lost......
BuffaloBillsForever Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 (edited) Does any of this sound familiar? It looks like Schwartz blamed the players as well when Crossman came under fire in Detroit when he refused to fire him. Everything is pointing to the fact that the special teams will probably not end well in Buffalo. http://www.mlive.com..._schwar_55.html Edited January 7, 2014 by BuffaloBillsForever
Alan Davidson Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Both Chuck Knox and Marv Levy were quoted as saying special teams can win or lose 3 games per year for you. Poor return coverage clearly let Cleveland back into the game (remember we were up 10-0 and 17-7) and squashed any chances to come back in the second New England game. It also gave Cinci an easy ot win.
BillsBytheBay Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 The crossman over-reaction is comical. if we had ended the season with the win against Mia or jax-- where the ST played reasonably well-- no one would have really been beating this drum. wrong. Many of us questioned it when it happened, and through the whole season.
thebandit27 Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Both Chuck Knox and Marv Levy were quoted as saying special teams can win or lose 3 games per year for you. Poor return coverage clearly let Cleveland back into the game (remember we were up 10-0 and 17-7) and squashed any chances to come back in the second New England game. It also gave Cinci an easy ot win. ST did not cost the Bills any of those 3 games. You can point to many different factors for why they lost all 3. The Tuel-led offense couldn't muster a single first down, leaving the D on the field far too long against Cleveland. Let's remember that Buffalo was leading that game long after the two big returns. The Bengals game ended after that return, yes. Does that mean that the inability to score on 4 straight chances from inside the 3 yard line and going 3-and-out on their only OT possession didn't "give" Cinci the win as well? There were several big plays allowed in that game, why does the one ST play somehow mean more than the 4 or 5 big plays allowed on defense? Speaking of defense, I tend to blame the 250 rushing yards for the NE loss in week 17, unless we're blaming Crossman for Dareus jumping offside on a FG try or the run D allowing Blount's final long TD run. Come to think of it, why isn't there a Pettine outrage thread? From the looks of things, the D cost this team more games than the ST.
NewEra Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 This makes me mad every day i see this thread. Who is in for a billboard. I would spring some $ ST did not cost the Bills any of those 3 games. You can point to many different factors for why they lost all 3. The Tuel-led offense couldn't muster a single first down, leaving the D on the field far too long against Cleveland. Let's remember that Buffalo was leading that game long after the two big returns. The Bengals game ended after that return, yes. Does that mean that the inability to score on 4 straight chances from inside the 3 yard line and going 3-and-out on their only OT possession didn't "give" Cinci the win as well? There were several big plays allowed in that game, why does the one ST play somehow mean more than the 4 or 5 big plays allowed on defense? Speaking of defense, I tend to blame the 250 rushing yards for the NE loss in week 17, unless we're blaming Crossman for Dareus jumping offside on a FG try or the run D allowing Blount's final long TD run. Come to think of it, why isn't there a Pettine outrage thread? From the looks of things, the D cost this team more games than the ST. I can't read the entire thread, just too painful. Just wondering if you were defending Crossman. If so, why?
juno999 Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 So far, the only legit reason to keep Crossman is he's only had one season with the Bills. Even this reason is crap! The Bills STs were awful on coverage teams and they had essentially no explosive plays in the return game. Plus, as noted earlier, Bills STs in the Browns and 2nd Pats game killed the Bills. Based on his prior performance as ST coach, hiring Crossman was a dubious decision in the first place and Marrone not canning him now is a disgrace. Where's the accountability? Can't wait for Marrone to talk next year about a Bills' loss that falls squarely on the Bills STs. If Marrone had canned Crossman, it would have been a breath of fresh air. A HC who was willing to admit he made a mistake and make a change. But no. Marrone takes care of one of his cronies instead and blames the players. Geesh, 14 years and counting!
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 wrong. Many of us questioned it when it happened, and through the whole season. There is a big difference between questioning it, and going on a Crossman witch hunt. Just about everyone--including me--questioned the hire; and also questioned him as a coach at various points during the season. The "Crossman must be burned at the stake or else I will lose all faith in the Bills organization" crusade is because of what happened in the last game of the season. It's classic Bills' fans histrionics.
Recommended Posts