Marrone yells to Russ "go ahead and fire me"

[FluffHead]

 

The best leaders recognize their own personal attributes and trust those attributes. Patton, Lombardi, Wooden, coach K, Tony LaRussa. All personality types can work. You get into trouble when a guy with a soft underbelly like Greggo or Marrone try to lookalike Patton. Maybe they could be good coaches but they do themselves in with false bravado.

 

Marrone has no more business trying to be mister tough guy than bobby Knight would have trying to coach like Joe Maddon.

 

Agreed. When you're in a position of authority and you try to be something other than yourself, the ranks see right through it

[Kelly the Dog]

Coaches don't have to be liked by the players, they don't have to always get along with their bosses, they don't have to be nice to the media, they don't have to abide by PC rules of not showing disagreements in front of underlings, they don't have to hide their huge egos, they don't have to win in preseason, they don't have to always be right...

 

Coaches need to hire good coordinators, make good to very good game plans, make the best lineups out of players they have, get their teams ready to play on Sunday and believe they will win, put players in positions to play to their strengths and succeed, and make 70-80% good in game decisions.

 

No matter what you say, you really don't know if Marrone is up to that task or not this year because last year was such a clusterfukk.

 

I have grave doubts that he is up to the task myself. If I had to bet I would say no. But he may be. We won't know until about 2-4-6 games into the season (even if we come out with a surprising upset win Sunday).

[OCinBuffalo]

Agreed. When you're in a position of authority and you try to be something other than yourself, the ranks see right through it

Speaking from a current position of authority, and having been in one almost my entire adult life?

 

With respect, horsecrap.

 

The ranks will see whatever a good leader wants them to see. In fact, that's his/her job. I believe your rule only applies to those who at best are "satisfactory leaders", and probably shouldn't have the gig. In contrast, good leaders are whoever the ranks need them to be, right now, depending on what is happening. Great leaders are the ones that make it all seem natural.

 

Since Patton came up? Patton is the perfect example of this.

 

Patton had a very high voice. In fact, an almost girlishly high voice. George C. Scott's (the guy in the movie) gravelly-voiced portrayal of Patton is actually a disservice to Patton's leadership ability. How?

 

Patton made a choice when he was at West Point. How could anyone respect a guy who sounds like Mickey Mouse? (Read this in Mickey Voice: "Colonel, immediately move your tanks, take hill 305, and attack the enemy's left flank!") So, he chose to start swearing. And, not just swearing, the kind of swearing that would make anyone of the time horrfied. He changed the focus.

 

Suddenly, he became a badass. You never had time to think about his high voice, because your focus was on this man peeling your ears off with cussing, with orders interspersed.

 

Patton became who he needed to be to lead. He became what the ranks needed him to be. He was already brilliant and innovative thinker, he just needed a stage presence. He totally made one up, and executed it every day, because that's what was required. This entire thing has been poorly understood, and Patton has been portrayed as a psychotic glory-hound, mostly by those who were jealous of his brilliance and innovations.

 

The truth: The man spent an entire career in the Army, through 2 wars....not being himself.

Edited September 6, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[TheFunPolice]

I asked before and I'm seriously asking again: what is Marrone's strength?

 

Rex Ryan is defense. Everyone knows that. McCarthy in GB is offense, and he calls the plays himself. Sean Payton is offense.. calls his own plays. Andy Reid is offense, calls his plays. Belichick is defense.

 

For Marv it was motivation and managing so many strong personalities.

 

For most head coaches it is easy. So what is Marrone's calling card?

 

I thought he was supposed to be some offensive guru like Chip Kelly (also easy to pinpoint his strength) but this offense is absolutely brutal. And he doesn't call the plays.

 

People skills don't seem to be his strong suit either. So what is it?

[QCity]

I was about to read this thread but when I got to the bottom of the first page and saw "Page 1 of 30" I did a double-take. Holy crap Sunday can't get here fast enough!

[BillsVet]

I know the first I thing I would do as an owner is hire a consultant (such as Ron Wolf) to review the team in terms of talent and management to help me make informed decisions about the future direction of the team.

 

I would love for Pegula (let's presume he's the next owner) to do this.

 

I believe people within the league know how dysfunctional this franchise has become, and an experienced senior level football person like Wolf would know the root cause for continued failure is the team's organization.

 

We can only hope Pegula cleans that front office entirely.

[stuvian]

OBD doesn't deserve respect from their HC if they don't consult him on major moves like Orton. I'm with Marrone on this. We've had enough nice guy milquetoasts at HC already.

[Big Blitz]

I asked before and I'm seriously asking again: what is Marrone's strength?

 

Rex Ryan is defense. Everyone knows that. McCarthy in GB is offense, and he calls the plays himself. Sean Payton is offense.. calls his own plays. Andy Reid is offense, calls his plays. Belichick is defense.

 

For Marv it was motivation and managing so many strong personalities.

 

For most head coaches it is easy. So what is Marrone's calling card?

 

I thought he was supposed to be some offensive guru like Chip Kelly (also easy to pinpoint his strength) but this offense is absolutely brutal. And he doesn't call the plays.

 

People skills don't seem to be his strong suit either. So what is it?

 

Well after George Cost.....I mean Russ Brandon looked under every stone...He found a guy in Marrone who was credited with turning around a dead football program in Syracuse.

 

Now....tell that to a solid group of vets especially on defense---hey guys, you're all doing it wrong. While somewhat true, the foundation was forming all we needed was the QB and a competent offensive coordinator. This is the league. These guys don't want to hear 'he rebuilt Syracuse.' They need results and a reason to KNOW every Sunday when they step on the field they will win.

 

Having crap QB play for years has diminished that belief especially relative to other teams that do. So if you don't get success quick, Marrone will lose this team.

[TheFunPolice]

My final thought on this topic is that SOMEONE in the organization gave this information to LaCanfora, and that person did a tremendous disservice to Marrone and the entire team.

 

Someone on the Bills official board made a great point that I haven't seen mentioned in this thread: these leaks have been par for the course for years with the Bills when they are looking to sway opinion against a guy.

 

It happened with Stevie. It happened with Lynch. It happened with Byrd. The list goes on and on.

 

This one is a bit different, but it might be preemptive. Still, this is the biggest reason that front office needs to be purged of all long-timers. It's time for this disfunctional crap to end. It kills morale and makes the organization look like a circus.

[FluffHead]

Speaking from a current position of authority, and having been in one almost my entire adult life?

 

Horsecrap.

 

The ranks will see whatever a good leader wants them to see. In fact, that's his/her job. I believe your rule only applies to those who at best are "satisfactory leaders", and probably shouldn't have the gig. In contrast, good leaders are whoever the ranks need them to be, right now, depending on what is happening. Great leaders are the ones that make it all seem natural.

 

Since Patton came up? Patton is the perfect example of this.

 

Patton had a very high voice. In fact, an almost girlishly high voice. George C. Scott's (the guy in the movie) gravelly-voiced portrayal of Patton is actually a disservice to Patton's leadership ability. How?

 

Patton made a choice when he was at West Point. How could anyone respect a guy who sounds like Mickey Mouse? (Read this in Mickey Voice: "Colonel, immediately move your tanks, take hill 305, and attack the enemy's left flank!") So, he chose to start swearing. And, not just swearing, the kind of swearing that would make anyone of the time horrfied. He changed the focus.

 

Suddenly, he became a badass. You never had time to think about his high voice, because your focus was on this man peeling your ears off with cussing, with orders interspersed.

 

Patton became who he needed to be to lead. He became what the ranks needed him to be. He was already brilliant and innovative thinker, he just needed a stage presence. He totally made one up, and executed it every day, because that's what was required. This entire thing has been poorly understood, and Patton has been portrayed as glory-hound.

 

The truth: The man spent an entire career in the Army, through 2 wars....not being himself.

 

Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was thinking more along the lines of leading today's youth and/or athletes. It's quite different that General Patton and his troops in a different era.

[Webster Guy]

 

 

we can call him saint doug after he does a damn thing in the NFL. And nobody tell me he used to work for Sean Payton, I know that. McDaniels and Mangini used to for Belicheat. So what?

and weiss and crennel. all sucked without brady just like bill did.

[MRW]

Well after George Cost.....I mean Russ Brandon looked under every stone...He found a guy in Marrone who was credited with turning around a dead football program in Syracuse.

 

Now....tell that to a solid group of vets especially on defense---hey guys, you're all doing it wrong. While somewhat true, the foundation was forming all we needed was the QB and a competent offensive coordinator. This is the league. These guys don't want to hear 'he rebuilt Syracuse.' They need results and a reason to KNOW every Sunday when they step on the field they will win.

 

Having crap QB play for years has diminished that belief especially relative to other teams that do. So if you don't get success quick, Marrone will lose this team.

But... the defense WAS doing it wrong before Marrone came in. In fact, they were historically bad.

[OCinBuffalo]

Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was thinking more along the lines of leading today's youth and/or athletes. It's quite different that General Patton and his troops in a different era.

Let's see:

1. Youth. The 3rd Army was mostly comprised of men between the ages 18-25.

2. Athletes. Let's see any NFL player be in real combat for a year, and ask them which activity is more "athletic".

3. Adversity and a highly skilled enemy. Patton lead his army into battle against an enemy who was almost certain to kill 5 of his tanks for every 1 his guys killed, and everyone, on both sides, knew it. The German tanks were better. But, we had more.

 

Where exactly is the difference? Marv Levy used WW2 to great effect with the Bills of the 90s. That was his thing. Not saying that it needs to be Marrone's thing.

 

Am saying: whatever "thing" you choose, does not need to be "yourself, or the ranks will see right through it". If the ranks can see right through your "thing", or anything that isn't "yourself"? If the only thing you have is "yourself"?

 

When are they going to stop "seeing"? Never.

 

Now they see everything. Now, who is doing the leading, an who is doing the following? You're constantly trying to cover up parts of "yourself" you don't want out there, but to no avail, because they can see through it all. No. This = FAIL.

 

I put this right up there with "he leads by example" and "he is a great leader because he treats everbody the same".

 

These are urban leadership myths created by those who've clearly never lead anything. Although, getting the feedback of "he treats everybody the same" is usually the sign of a master leader, who has deftly created that illusive effect.

[SmokinES3]

joe buscaglia, Paul Hamilton, schopp and Bulldog treated it like it was gospel on Bills Roundtable. They went places with it that made me want to give up on everything. So doomed.

That was brutal. Finally Schoop actually told them to can it because it was so depressing. That was laughable.

[OCinBuffalo]

That was brutal. Finally Schoop actually told them to can it because it was so depressing. That was laughable.

Now, I am depressed that I missed that. Schopp telling others not to be negative?

 

What was it, "opposite day"?

[major]

Marrone- buddy Ryan, Brandon- ditka, punky qb- Manuel, Fred Jackson- Walter Payton, etc... We are repeating the 85 bears game plan to victory. Hope our defense is like the 85 bears this season. Go bills! Once we beat the bears on Sunday, we will forget all about this.

[OCinBuffalo]

OBD doesn't deserve respect from their HC if they don't consult him on major moves like Orton. I'm with Marrone on this. We've had enough nice guy milquetoasts at HC already.

I missed this. And this is a very interesting post.

 

Let me ask you: when is the last time you felt like you were "with" a Bills head coach, about anything?

 

See? Well, at least I think it's interesting.

[Fadingpain]

Speaking from a current position of authority, and having been in one almost my entire adult life?

 

With respect, horsecrap.

 

The ranks will see whatever a good leader wants them to see. In fact, that's his/her job. I believe your rule only applies to those who at best are "satisfactory leaders", and probably shouldn't have the gig. In contrast, good leaders are whoever the ranks need them to be, right now, depending on what is happening. Great leaders are the ones that make it all seem natural.

 

Since Patton came up? Patton is the perfect example of this.

 

Patton had a very high voice. In fact, an almost girlishly high voice. George C. Scott's (the guy in the movie) gravelly-voiced portrayal of Patton is actually a disservice to Patton's leadership ability. How?

 

Patton made a choice when he was at West Point. How could anyone respect a guy who sounds like Mickey Mouse? (Read this in Mickey Voice: "Colonel, immediately move your tanks, take hill 305, and attack the enemy's left flank!") So, he chose to start swearing. And, not just swearing, the kind of swearing that would make anyone of the time horrfied. He changed the focus.

 

Suddenly, he became a badass. You never had time to think about his high voice, because your focus was on this man peeling your ears off with cussing, with orders interspersed.

 

Patton became who he needed to be to lead. He became what the ranks needed him to be. He was already brilliant and innovative thinker, he just needed a stage presence. He totally made one up, and executed it every day, because that's what was required. This entire thing has been poorly understood, and Patton has been portrayed as a psychotic glory-hound, mostly by those who were jealous of his brilliance and innovations.

 

The truth: The man spent an entire career in the Army, through 2 wars....not being himself.

 

Patton was not a brilliant military mind, loved by any grunt who served under him, or a brilliant leader. He did grasp the importance of fast moving, mobile, tank-based warfare by 1944, however. And he did have a cartoonish, high pitched, girly voice.

 

If you want to study a brilliant leader and military mind of WWII vintage, I suggest starting with Verlorene Siege or "Lost Victories" by arguably the greatest strategic mind of WWII: Erich von Manstein.

 

I love finding a way to work military history into a thread on a Bills forum about a fight between a mediocre coach and a lame duck front office. LOL.

 

Maybe we can all just switch over to discussing WWII strategy and tactics. On the whole, it's more interesting.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Stopthepain

[Deranged Rhino]

Patton was not a brilliant military mind, loved by any grunt who served under him, or a brilliant leader. He did grasp the importance of fast moving, mobile, tank-based warfare by 1944, however. And he did have a cartoonish, high pitched, girly voice.

 

If you want to study a brilliant leader and military mind of WWII vintage, I suggest starting with Verlorene Siege or "Lost Victories" by arguably the greatest strategic mind of WWII: Erich von Mannstein.

 

I love finding a way to work military history into a thread on a Bills forum about a fight between a mediocre coach and a lame duck front office. LOL.

 

Maybe we can all just switch over to discussing WWII strategy and tactics. On the whole, it's more interesting.

 

Cue Tom in 3...2...1...

[beerme1]

When it's too tough for them...

 

I'm seven pages back but I want to say, I LOVE THIS!!! :-)