Russ Brandon

[thebandit27]

I like all the argument back and forth about "change" yet our record has stayed the same.

 

Hopefully this the year we actually some results on the football field.

 

Once again, let's not conflate changing in organizational structure, mindset, and mentality with on-field results. It probably comes down to semantics, as folks tie the two statements "our record hasn't changed" and "nothing has changed" together, when in fact, they are nowhere near the same.

 

There is no doubt that the changes have taken place on the football side. The same thing happened on the business side 8 -10 years ago when RB was given the chance. He minimized the power of all of those people that were coasting along on the old way of doing things (Munson, Foran, etc..) People getting huge checks to really do nothing noteworthy. They were replaced by younger, more creative and innovative executives tasked with catching up with the rest of the league. It has worked.

 

The same thing happened in the last year on the football side. The jury is out on the results but the changes have taken place. Analytics are playing a bigger role, the GM and coach are 1 year in, they tried to find the face of their franchise (whom I don't think is very good), they have let expensive free agents go and tried to spend that money on multiple players to build depth, etc... Bandit referenced a bunch more above. The changes have undeniably taken place. Have they worked? It's too early to tell IMO. My best guess is like everything some will work and others will fail.

 

Thank you...sometimes it takes another, more clearly-stated post to bring the argument into focus.

[birdog1960]

 

 

As others here can tell you, the team's credibility around the league has improved significantly in the last 16 months--that should tell us something.

when you start from zero, it's not difficult to improve. so, who then do we hold responsible for starting from such a low place. are any of the likely suspects still around?

[Dorkington]

Once again, let's not conflate changing in organizational structure, mindset, and mentality with on-field results. It probably comes down to semantics, as folks tie the two statements "our record hasn't changed" and "nothing has changed" together, when in fact, they are nowhere near the same.

 

 

 

Thank you...sometimes it takes another, more clearly-stated post to bring the argument into focus.

 

Well, of course people have changed, you can't argue that. Brandon is in control instead of Wilson. Whaley is the GM instead of Nix, etc. We have new coaches, new players, etc. That all has changed. And with all the people changes, there will be "culture" change. So yeah, I guess... sure... everything has changed.

 

The results haven't. Yet.

 

Personally, I don't really care about the people, I care about the results. I like the new group of guys personally... but I also liked Chan and Fitz. I just want to win some damned football games.

[Kirby Jackson]

when you start from zero, it's not difficult to improve. so, who then do we hold responsible for starting from such a low place. are any of the likely suspects still around?

I can speak to this. Very few are still there. The training staff would probably be the last group that would have fallen there. They even (famously) fired the equipment guy. Russ has been over football ops for a year now.

 

Two of the guys that I hold most accountable for where we are today are Guy and Modrak who are both gone. Guy was responsible for free agency and Modrak the draft. Each of them were in positions of power for a number of years with poor results. Those were the two making the decisions from the end of Donahoe until Buddy Nix (not Levy, not Brandon). That period was not a great time for talent on this roster. How many guys were brought in and developed between '05-'10 (or whatever it was)?

Edited April 2, 2014 by Kirby Jackson

[thebandit27]

when you start from zero, it's not difficult to improve. so, who then do we hold responsible for starting from such a low place. are any of the likely suspects still around?

 

Now we're getting into opinion territory...mine is that it fell on the shoulders of Ralph for going too long between appointing football (read: personnel) people to be in charge of the on-field side of the team. He got burned by Donahoe (whose biggest flaw was his inability to pick a head coach) and then didn't trust anyone with football acumen to run the team, so he turned to people he did trust (Marv, Russ) at the expense of personnel evaluation.

 

Once he learned his lesson, he trusted the football operations to a scout (Nix) instead of a de facto GM...an improvement, but not the improvement that was needed. Once Russ took over, he worked quickly to fix those mistakes, appointing a true GM in Whaley, who re-vamped the entire personnel department to reflect what he's seen as a successful model in Pittsburgh.

 

Will it work? I don't know, and neither does anyone else. What I can tell you is that the Russ/Whaley move was widely viewed as a smart one around the league.

[Mr. WEO]

That's a pretty blatantly slanted take on the situation.

 

Marrone was a candidate for at least 2 other NFL head coaching jobs; as much as you make it seem that the team went dumpster-diving for their coach, they didn't. I also can't possibly fathom how you simultaneously criticize Marrone for both making changes and not making changes to his staff. Folks tend to have a stronger foundation for their point when they pick one consistent mindset and stick with it.

 

As to Schwartz, coaches get fired every year and resume their jobs as coordinator with success. I'm sure you don't need me to list all of them...and by the way, Schwartz is not the HC here; it isn't his job to control the players, as that responsibility falls on Marrone.

 

Unlike you, I like the fact that the team now has 3 former DCs working on the defensive side of the ball. I also like that they added a special assistant on offense in Hostler. To me, this shows progress in terms of coaching.

 

Lastly, you don't have to take my word for it, as other folks on this board can speak more directly to how this team is viewed around the league. Their credibility (and stability) as a well-functioning football organization is on the rise, whether you can see it or not.

 

Oh, now it's not really that hard to fathom. Firing a position coach you just hired because of "philosophical differences" (many here claim it was because the WR's were poorly behaved--but that's the HC's job, no?) and not firing a woefully underperforming ST coach. It's not inconsistent to critisize the changes that were made AND those that were not made. You understand this, I'm pretty sure.

 

Ok, Marrone was a candidate for other jobs. Pettine was a candidate for a HC job this year, but the team that hired him really wanted someone else. Being a cnadidate isn't very meaningful if you not a likely pick. I doubt the Bills were Marrone's top choice either.

 

As for the Bills rep around the league, I guess I will have to "take your word for it", because you offer nothing else. And as others have pointed out, the board was saying the same thing 4 years ago about "real change" when they brought ol Buddy Nix and Chan "he makes his system fit his players" Gailey.

[Kirby Jackson]

And as others have pointed out, the board was saying the same thing 4 years ago about "real change" when they brought ol Buddy Nix and Chan "he makes his system fit his players" Gailey.

I guess that the point is that because Gailey didn't work it doesn't mean that Marrone won't? I am on record however that keeping Crossman was a terrible decision by Marrone. We will see how it plays out I guess but he showed me nothing to warrant keeping his job as ST coordinator.

 

I think that Buddy Nix did a good job in his time here. The level of talent on the roster from when he came to when he left grew substantially.

[K-9]

I guess that the point is that because Gailey didn't work it doesn't mean that Marrone won't? I am on record however that keeping Crossman was a terrible decision by Marrone. We will see how it plays out I guess but he showed me nothing to warrant keeping his job as ST coordinator.

 

I think that Buddy Nix did a good job in his time here. The level of talent on the roster from when he came to when he left grew substantially.

 

The point is, it's far easier to be invested in negative outcomes.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[May Day 10]

building a competitive NFL team isnt/shouldnt be this difficult/complicated and take much time.

 

 

Not too long ago, Denver, Kansas City, Seattle, and Carolina were picking ahead of Buffalo.

[Dorkington]

I guess that the point is that because Gailey didn't work it doesn't mean that Marrone won't? I am on record however that keeping Crossman was a terrible decision by Marrone. We will see how it plays out I guess but he showed me nothing to warrant keeping his job as ST coordinator.

 

I think that Buddy Nix did a good job in his time here. The level of talent on the roster from when he came to when he left grew substantially.

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not saying Marrone won't work. (Or the FO changes, or the personnel changes)

 

All I know is, SO FAR, the results have been the same. I will, of course, give it time, before I call for change again, though.

[Mr. WEO]

I guess that the point is that because Gailey didn't work it doesn't mean that Marrone won't? I am on record however that keeping Crossman was a terrible decision by Marrone. We will see how it plays out I guess but he showed me nothing to warrant keeping his job as ST coordinator.

 

I think that Buddy Nix did a good job in his time here. The level of talent on the roster from when he came to when he left grew substantially.

 

Gailey, Edwards, Wanny, Greggo, Mularkey......no, this doesn't doom Marrone to the same fate, but I can't pretend that he is materially different from them based on his career thus far. Also, much has been made of the increase in talent over Buddy's reign, yet the result haven't changed. Many coaches on the staff have changed, yet none have made proper use of all of this talent. That's all I'm saying.

The point is, it's far easier to be invested in negative outcomes.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

Then you've missed the point.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Now we're getting into opinion territory...mine is that it fell on the shoulders of Ralph for going too long between appointing football (read: personnel) people to be in charge of the on-field side of the team. He got burned by Donahoe (whose biggest flaw was his inability to pick a head coach) and then didn't trust anyone with football acumen to run the team <snip>

 

Was that really Donahoe's biggest flaw? What was his football acumen record? 31-48. 3 elite players in 5 years. His QB situation was never settled, with Rob Johnson, Alex Van Pelt, Drew Bledsoe, JP Losman, and Kelly Holcomb spinning through the revolving door. Interesting his best draft was in 2001 and before he brought in Tom Modrak, etc. Mike Williams was a top 5 draft pick bust. JP Losman was THE bust at his position in a draft that became golden at his position. Willis McGahee was a luxury pick and never was the same guy he had been in college. Roscoe Parrish, who? Donahoe's "under siege" mentality was fully on display towards the end, and he wasn't getting along well with the media or fans.

 

By the way, has Tom Donahoe's name been mentioned for another NFL position since the Bills? Before the Bills he was courted by Miami, New Orleans, Houston, Washington, and Philadelphia.

[thebandit27]

Oh, now it's not really that hard to fathom. Firing a position coach you just hired because of "philosophical differences" (many here claim it was because the WR's were poorly behaved--but that's the HC's job, no?) and not firing a woefully underperforming ST coach. It's not inconsistent to critisize the changes that were made AND those that were not made. You understand this, I'm pretty sure.

 

I haven't seen anyone claim that Hilliard was fired because the WR were poorly behaved, so I'll have to take you at your word. My personal opinion is that Hilliard was fired because his WRs didn't run their routes very well much of the time, which created confusion for the mess of QBs the team fielded and hampered the offense.

 

And no, it's not inconsistent to criticize certain changes versus certain non-changes...it is, however, inconsistent to bash the coach for firing a position coach whose unit isn't performing and then bash him for not firing a position coach whose unit isn't performing. It isn't like he fired Pettine and kept Crossman.

 

Ok, Marrone was a candidate for other jobs. Pettine was a candidate for a HC job this year, but the team that hired him really wanted someone else. Being a cnadidate isn't very meaningful if you not a likely pick. I doubt the Bills were Marrone's top choice either.

 

We'll never know if Marrone was seriously considered anywhere else as the #1 candidate, given that Buffalo acted quickly when they found out Chicago was going to bring him in for an interview. All we know is that he interviewed with Buffalo, Philadelphia, and San Diego, and was scheduled to interview with Chicago and Cleveland.

 

If you're basing your opinion on the Marrone hire purely on your speculation that he wasn't anyone else's #1 choice, well, IMO that's pretty flimsy reasoning.

 

As for the Bills rep around the league, I guess I will have to "take your word for it", because you offer nothing else. And as others have pointed out, the board was saying the same thing 4 years ago about "real change" when they brought ol Buddy Nix and Chan "he makes his system fit his players" Gailey.

 

What do you want me to offer? A signed affidavit from GMs around the NFL? Read up a little on the league-wide reactions to Brandon's taking over as CEO and Whaley being promoted.

 

If your assertion is that the Whaley/Marrone hirings are viewed as similar in any way to the Nix/Gailey hirings, well, I don't see how you can honestly believe that. If that's not your assertion, then what, exactly, is your point?

 

Actually, don't answer that...I know your point: the team isn't winning, and that means that no changes have taken place. It's incorrect.

 

Was that really Donahoe's biggest flaw? What was his football acumen record? 31-48. 3 elite players in 5 years. His QB situation was never settled, with Rob Johnson, Alex Van Pelt, Drew Bledsoe, JP Losman, and Kelly Holcomb spinning through the revolving door. Interesting his best draft was in 2001 and before he brought in Tom Modrak, etc. Mike Williams was a top 5 draft pick bust. JP Losman was THE bust at his position in a draft that became golden at his position. Willis McGahee was a luxury pick and never was the same guy he had been in college. Roscoe Parrish, who? Donahoe's "under siege" mentality was fully on display towards the end, and he wasn't getting along well with the media or fans.

 

By the way, has Tom Donahoe's name been mentioned for another NFL position since the Bills? Before the Bills he was courted by Miami, New Orleans, Houston, Washington, and Philadelphia.

 

In my opinion, yes. He actually brought in some very good talent...let's not dismiss that he got Bledsoe, who played well for two seasons here. He also brought in Takeo Spikes, Sam Adams, Rian Lindell, and a few other FAs that did a nice job for the team.

 

Had he been able to put a better head coach in charge of things, he probably would've lasted longer...don't get me wrong, he didn't do a bang-up job on the personnel side, but I think his coaching choices hurt him more than his personnel evaluations.

[GA BILLS FAN]

In some ways, I envy the PRO-Brandon crowd. Still having hope in the face of 14 years of failure is amazing. To a lot of us, the proof, will be in the results on the field and nothing else suffices. I was excited when the Bills hired Gregg Williams and had an established player personnel guy in Tom Donahoe at the helm. I rode the wave of optimism up as high as I could when the Bills beat the Pats 31-0 on opening day, only to have my heart broken with another wasted season. Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat with Mularkey/Levy, Jauron/Brandon and Gailey/Nix with the same results, sell me hope and then pop my balloon. I want to get excited and be optimistic about Marrone/Whaley and buy the argument that all is better because now Russ is in charge. I just can't. My heart wants to believe, but my eyes and mind see too much of the same to be fooled by the self-proclaimed "marketing genius" and the guy the media dubs, "nobody sells hope like Russ Brandon". Sorry, Russ, I'm not buying. Show me something on the field, FIRST !!

[thebandit27]

In some ways, I envy the PRO-Brandon crowd. Still having hope in the face of 14 years of failure is amazing. To a lot of us, the proof, will be in the results on the field and nothing else suffices. I was excited when the Bills hired Gregg Williams and had an established player personnel guy in Tom Donahoe at the helm. I rode the wave of optimism up as high as I could when the Bills beat the Pats 31-0 on opening day, only to have my heart broken with another wasted season. Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat with Mularkey/Levy, Jauron/Brandon and Gailey/Nix with the same results, sell me hope and then pop my balloon. I want to get excited and be optimistic about Marrone/Whaley and buy the argument that all is better because now Russ is in charge. I just can't. My heart wants to believe, but my eyes and mind see too much of the same to be fooled by the self-proclaimed "marketing genius" and the guy the media dubs, "nobody sells hope like Russ Brandon". Sorry, Russ, I'm not buying. Show me something on the field, FIRST !!

 

At what point did I, or anyone else in this thread, claim otherwise?

[GA BILLS FAN]

At what point did I, or anyone else in this thread, claim otherwise?

Now I'm confused. I thought your defense of Brandon was support for what he has done and that he has indeed changed the organization for the better. If we are all aligned to the fact that nothing is accomplished until we see it on the field, then we are on the same page. In my mind, none of the changes matter until we see it on the field, until that time, Brandon has failed, albeit we can argue whether that failure started 8 years ago when he was appointed to a "high level executive position"; 5 years ago when he was named CEO, 1 year ago when he was "in complete control" or 1 week ago when Ralph passed.

[thebandit27]

Now I'm confused. I thought your defense of Brandon was support for what he has done and that he has indeed changed the organization for the better. If we are all aligned to the fact that nothing is accomplished until we see it on the field, then we are on the same page. In my mind, none of the changes matter until we see it on the field, until that time, Brandon has failed, albeit we can argue whether that failure started 8 years ago when he was appointed to a "high level executive position"; 5 years ago when he was named CEO, 1 year ago when he was "in complete control" or 1 week ago when Ralph passed.

 

My bone of contention with some of the sentiment in this thread has always been that changes have absolutely occurred. I'm now clear on where we differ: you are of the opinion that Brandon is a failure until the product on the field proves otherwise, whereas I am of the opinion that Brandon is an unknown as "the boss" until the product on the field over a significant period of time proves one way or another.

 

Where I have lauded Brandon is his willingness to make changes to the football side of the organization--changes that were sorely needed. I have been consistent in saying that I like the feel of the football people in charge, from Whaley to Jim Monos to Kelvin Fisher and right down to Marrone...obviously, they need to show improvement on the field to gain my continued support.

 

Hopefully we're on the same page now, at least with respect to each other's opinions.

[Sisyphean Bills]

In my opinion, yes. He actually brought in some very good talent...let's not dismiss that he got Bledsoe, who played well for two seasons here. He also brought in Takeo Spikes, Sam Adams, Rian Lindell, and a few other FAs that did a nice job for the team.

 

Had he been able to put a better head coach in charge of things, he probably would've lasted longer...don't get me wrong, he didn't do a bang-up job on the personnel side, but I think his coaching choices hurt him more than his personnel evaluations.

 

I think he made more mistakes than just the coaches. Obviously, not every decision he made backfired on him, but plenty did and there is no doubt he was very deeply involved in all the decisions being made during his run.

 

But, on the coaches, he offered Gregg Williams an extension the year before he was fired and when the team was on the rise. It was Williams that declined the extension, stating that he'd rather ride out his contract and see where he was at the end of it. Gregg didn't make his reasons known, but a couple of guesses are that (1) he wasn't entirely happy with the setup [remember Donahoe was eyeball deep in decisions] and (2) he thought he might be able to push a better contract with a good season. After burning his #1 pick on a guy that would never play a down for him, the season came apart and the Bills made the decision that they couldn't offer Williams a second contract after that train wreck. I know the popular opinion around here is that Williams was a terrible coach, but to be Devil's advocate: his first season was a house cleaning and "cap jail" that left them with almost no talent and the 3-13 record was earned because of it. His second season was 8-8 and Bledsoe was very popular and hero of legend at that point. His third season was 6-10, with the McGahee non-factor, and the trade of one of Bledsoe's big targets to Atlanta rather than paying him. (6-10 is considered going in the right direction today in prior posts in this thread.)

 

So, ignoring the first year, Williams was 2 games under .500 as a green head coach learning on the job. If Williams stays, does he argue to stick with Bledsoe rather than go down the Losman route? Does the continuity of the coaching staff let them develop into a better staff? Does it keep the same systems in place long enough to develop the right draft model and keep the talent pipeline flush?

 

Maybe it was simply that WIlliams and Mularkey sucked. It's true that neither of them righted the ship in their brief stays.

[thebandit27]

I think he made more mistakes than just the coaches. Obviously, not every decision he made backfired on him, but plenty did and there is no doubt he was very deeply involved in all the decisions being made during his run.

 

But, on the coaches, he offered Gregg Williams an extension the year before he was fired and when the team was on the rise. It was Williams that declined the extension, stating that he'd rather ride out his contract and see where he was at the end of it. Gregg didn't make his reasons known, but a couple of guesses are that (1) he wasn't entirely happy with the setup [remember Donahoe was eyeball deep in decisions] and (2) he thought he might be able to push a better contract with a good season. After burning his #1 pick on a guy that would never play a down for him, the season came apart and the Bills made the decision that they couldn't offer Williams a second contract after that train wreck. I know the popular opinion around here is that Williams was a terrible coach, but to be Devil's advocate: his first season was a house cleaning and "cap jail" that left them with almost no talent and the 3-13 record was earned because of it. His second season was 8-8 and Bledsoe was very popular and hero of legend at that point. His third season was 6-10, with the McGahee non-factor, and the trade of one of Bledsoe's big targets to Atlanta rather than paying him.

 

So, ignoring the first year, Williams was 2 games under .500 as a green head coach learning on the job. If Williams stays, does he argue to stick with Bledsoe rather than go down the Losman route? Does the continuity of the coaching staff let them develop into a better staff? Does it keep the same systems in place long enough to develop the right draft model and keep the talent pipeline flush?

 

Maybe it was simply that WIlliams and Mularkey sucked. It's true that neither of them righted the ship in their brief stays.

 

Good points all around...chicken or the egg I suppose.

[Kirby Jackson]

I am saying the same thing as bandit. We do not yet know if it will be a success or failure. For the 1st time in my lifetime I have confidence in the people calling the shots from Russ to Whaley to Marrone. Those guys have a lot of respect around the league. Does that mean that they are going to be great? Who knows the outcome. I can tell you this no one thought that Gailey or Jauron were good hires but they were about 10th on the list. No one wanted the Bills job because they had no talent. There was a lot of interest in Marrone last year and the Bills snatched him up. Is he a good coach? Who knows but the jury is out.

 

Each of those guys is smart and progressive. OBD finally has centralized, unquestioned leadership which has never been the case. Despite whatever came out there had been a power struggle in OP & in Grosse Pointe for a long, long time. A lot of people had a say but not a lot of people could decide. That has now changed in the last year. Ultimately the record will dictate if it has worked but trust me this is not "the same ole' Bills."

Edited April 2, 2014 by Kirby Jackson