Fire Hackett

[NoSaint]

So if I'm getting this right: because we scored off four turnovers and not six, getting us 20 points rather than 26 or 34, and because without turnovers we only managed 23 points...on the road...against a division opponent...to win...where we've never won before...by 20 points, Hackett sucks?

 

May be, just may be, in a game where the offense hangs 43 points going into the bye THERE WAS NO !@#$ING NEED TO CREATE TAPE ON ANY THING ELSE.

 

Not only and am I befuddled by the absence of ends in all this bitching about the means, I'm shocked that nobody can explain what the point in running [whatever !@#$ing plays you seem to think they should have] when WE DIDNT !@#$ING NEED TO.

 

There are eight games left on the schedule, one against each of our division opponents and and four against other teams from our conference.

 

If we can win by running it up the middle and having out defense shut them down, why make it easier for teams to scout every wrinkle we potentially offer?

 

Because we didn't put the game away early like we should have probably. We didn't know we were getting 17 turnovers gifted to us and 43 points when we were in a 1 score game at halftime

[Kelly the Dog]

So if I'm getting this right: because we scored off four turnovers and not six, getting us 20 points rather than 26 or 34, and because without turnovers we only managed 23 points...on the road...against a division opponent...to win...where we've never won before...by 20 points, Hackett sucks?

 

May be, just may be, in a game where the offense hangs 43 points going into the bye THERE WAS NO !@#$ING NEED TO CREATE TAPE ON ANY THING ELSE.

 

Not only and am I befuddled by the absence of ends in all this bitching about the means, I'm shocked that nobody can explain what the point in running [whatever !@#$ing plays you seem to think they should have] when WE DIDNT !@#$ING NEED TO.

 

There are eight games left on the schedule, one against each of our division opponents and and four against other teams from our conference.

 

If we can win by running it up the middle and having out defense shut them down, why make it easier for teams to scout every wrinkle we potentially offer?

So if I'm getting this right: because we scored off four turnovers and not six, getting us 20 points rather than 26 or 34, and because without turnovers we only managed 23 points...on the road...against a division opponent...to win...where we've never won before...by 20 points, Hackett sucks?

 

May be, just may be, in a game where the offense hangs 43 points going into the bye THERE WAS NO !@#$ING NEED TO CREATE TAPE ON ANY THING ELSE.

 

Not only and am I befuddled by the absence of ends in all this bitching about the means, I'm shocked that nobody can explain what the point in running [whatever !@#$ing plays you seem to think they should have] when WE DIDNT !@#$ING NEED TO.

 

There are eight games left on the schedule, one against each of our division opponents and and four against other teams from our conference.

 

If we can win by running it up the middle and having out defense shut them down, why make it easier for teams to scout every wrinkle we potentially offer?

We had six turnovers! This was not a having the defense shut them down, they scored 23 points. We did nothing running up the middle, we scored most of our points by not doing what the HC and OC want to do. Can't you see that? The conservative stuff did next to nothing. The spreading them out idea was 3 of our 4 biggest plays. With 3 turnovers this game would have been close, and it could have gone the other way. We had 6.

[The Big Cat]

 

 

We had six turnovers! This was not a having the defense shut them down, they scored 23 points. We did nothing running up the middle, we scored most of our points by not doing what the HC and OC want to do. Can't you see that? The conservative stuff did next to nothing. The spreading them out idea was 3 of our 4 biggest plays. With 3 turnovers this game would have been close, and it could have gone the other way. We had 6.

 

Did next to nothing? Did we win?

 

What OUTCOME were you hoping for?

 

 

 

Because we didn't put the game away early like we should have probably. We didn't know we were getting 17 turnovers gifted to us and 43 points when we were in a 1 score game at halftime

 

Gifted?

 

I see. So NOBODY deserves credit.

 

Okay.

[Kelly the Dog]

Did next to nothing? Did we win?

 

What OUTCOME were you hoping for?

 

 

 

Gifted?

 

I see. So NOBODY deserves credit.

 

Okay.

You're just ignoring what happened in the game and the last several games.

 

If you want to say that it doesn't matter how you play, or what happens in a game, it's all good if you win, I will accept that. And I understand it. I have taken that stance many times myself.

 

If you think however that this is the best use of our players that will lead this roster this year to play to its potential and go as far as it can go I have to question your stability.

[The Big Cat]

 

You're just ignoring what happened in the game and the last several games.

 

If you want to say that it doesn't matter how you play, or what happens in a game, it's all good if you win, I will accept that. And I understand it. I have taken that stance many times myself.

 

If you think however that this is the best use of our players that will lead this roster this year to play to its potential and go as far as it can go I have to question your stability.

 

I'm ignoring what happened?

 

So as far as how you've acknowledged the offense's 43 points on the road? How would you characterize that?

[Pondslider]

Marrone should be fired for not firing Hackett so they can both go down together.

[RayFinkle]

When I saw this thread, I thought it was tongue in cheek. 6 turnovers an they scored 43....FORTY THREE....points. How many should they have scored? 70?

 

Sounds like the "fans" need a new whipping boy now that they can't complain about Spiller.

[Pondslider]

Hey, I've hated Hackett since he was hired and said he was bringing back the K-Gun and I've only grown to hate him more since then.

Edited October 27, 2014 by Pondslider

[Kelly the Dog]

I'm ignoring what happened?

 

So as far as how you've acknowledged the offense's 43 points on the road? How would you characterize that?

Okay, I will acquiesce. With this 2-3 TE offense, we will win all games we get 6 turnovers, five of which ended up at the opponents 46, 1, 31, 10, 14 yard line and one at midfield.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I think what bothers me most about Marrone/Hackett is that neither seem to have a feel for momentum. I may be wrong, but it seemed like after EVERY turnover they didn't want to capitalize on the momentum with a quick-strike, go for the jugular play and against the one of the worst secondaries in the game to boot. They are old school in many ways and jumping on a team after a turnover is as old school as it gets and they don't seem to want to take chances. Just little feel for the game.

Yup -- we were SCREAMING from the stands for them to run that third-down deep strike on first down, one of those times. You simply can't end the drive in their 40s (and punt) that many times. Killer instinct. Gotta have it to go far in the playoffs, IMO.

 

Okay, I will acquiesce. With this 2-3 TE offense, we will win all games we get 6 turnovers, five of which ended up at the opponents 46, 1, 31, 10, 14 yard line and one at midfield.

[Deranged Rhino]

I'm frankly stunned by the amount of support Hackett is receiving on here.

 

5-3 is a nice feeling... GO BILLS!

[pimp on da' net]

I've been a silent supporter of Hackett hoping he would get more agressive with his play calling but the constant run run pass punt is getting ridiculous.

 

I'm not sure if he's the fall guy or NOT, Marrone may be hampering him because it defies logic. They continue to run the same basic sets & formations like its still pre-season...absolutely no creativity.

 

The system is designed not to create a mismatch and /or exploit the weakness of the defense's personnel. Its like he just calls plays with no regard of the matchup, IMO.

 

Has Hackett & staff ever aligned a formation to put the opposing defense on it heels, scheme-wise? Good coordinator's scheme an offense to the talent at hand and scout out the short-comings of the opponent. I just don't get the feeling that, this is what he does...at all!!!

 

He needed more seasoning in college as an OC because he's in way over his head, IMO.

[KD in CA]

When I saw this thread, I thought it was tongue in cheek. 6 turnovers an they scored 43....FORTY THREE....points. How many should they have scored? 70?

 

Sounds like the "fans" need a new whipping boy now that they can't complain about Spiller.

 

Didn't watch the game, did you? What did they have, 7 drives without a first down?

[Rob's House]

This thread title reads more like a screen name.

[NoSaint]

 

 

I'm ignoring what happened?

 

So as far as how you've acknowledged the offense's 43 points on the road? How would you characterize that?

 

Do you believe hackett maximizes our offensive potential consistently?

[thewildrabbit]

I'm going agains the grain here. He called a sound game. I'm aware that many people get frustrated with his numerous runs up the middle but he is emphasizing those types of runs because he wants to keep the defense somewhat off balance and protect his qb. Having an even minimally effective running game restrains the defense from going full bore forward against one of the least mobile qbs in the league. I described him in another thread as having the mobility of a one legged stork.

 

This was a game in which it was appropriate to be very cautious in the passing game because our defense for most of the game had the Jets stymied on offense. If you recall the Chargers took the same approach, especially in the second half, in their game against us.

 

Overall, I thought Hackett called a smart game. For him the challenge is to come up with a good strategy for a team that has serious issues on the OL. In this game I thought his playcalling was prudent and smart for the way the game was developing.

Seriously? Ever consider that Orton is changing the play at the line into something that works?

 

While I love Kyle Orton, I also hate that he is making Hackett and Marrone look somewhat competent. Because I highly doubt this team beats the better teams they play this year with a crap O line & run game. Both Marrone and Hackett are responsible for the play of the offense other then Orton. So many penalties.

 

Six* turnovers helped the Bills win this game, and the 32 rushes for 67 yards with a 2.1 YPC avg didn't.

Edited October 27, 2014 by FeartheLosing

[NickelCity]

I'm frankly stunned by the amount of support Hackett is receiving on here.

 

5-3 is a nice feeling... GO BILLS!

 

+1

[Fixxxer]

Seriously? Ever consider that Orton is changing the play at the line into something that works?

 

While I love Kyle Orton, I also hate that he is making Hackett and Marrone look somewhat competent. Because I highly doubt this team beats the better teams they play this year with a crap O line & run game. Both Marrone and Hackett are responsible for the play of the offense other then Orton. So many penalties.

 

Six* turnovers helped the Bills win this game, and the 32 rushes for 67 yards with a 2.1 YPC avg didn't.

 

So, this team offense it's all about Orton?

[TheFunPolice]

Here's the thing: Marrone is the type of coach you're only going to like if he wins. The guy calls himself "St. Doug." That ought to tell you what he's like.

 

Hackett is HIS OC. As long as he is coach he is going to do it HIS way. Playing Orton was HIS call. This offense is HIS call too. Hackett works for Marrone and gets his marching orders from him.

 

In short, Marrone is often an unpleasant and confrontational man to be around and demands things be done EXACTLY the way he wants them done. He's often not a very engaging person at the podium during press conferences. He's really what many fans CLAIMED to want for years: a strict disciplinarian who takes no BS.

 

Many still pine for the days of winning four or six "exciting" games under Chan Gailey. He was SO GOOD! yet his teams got embarrassed on a weekly basis throughout his tenure here. Must have been talent, because BOY could that guy call a game! And he took the TV out of the weight room!

 

Meanwhile, Marrone's teams win in SPITE of him! LOL you can't make this stuff up!

 

So far the results are 5 wins in 8 games. That's pretty good. Let's see the whole season before we start firing people.

Edited October 27, 2014 by TheFunPolice

[FireChan]

This thread title reads more like a screen name.

 

Hey wait a second...

 

Seriously? Ever consider that Orton is changing the play at the line into something that works?

 

While I love Kyle Orton, I also hate that he is making Hackett and Marrone look somewhat competent. Because I highly doubt this team beats the better teams they play this year with a crap O line & run game. Both Marrone and Hackett are responsible for the play of the offense other then Orton. So many penalties.

 

Six* turnovers helped the Bills win this game, and the 32 rushes for 67 yards with a 2.1 YPC avg didn't.

 

Did you ever consider that Orton checked into some of runs? It appeared that he did.

 

I'm frankly stunned by the amount of support Hackett is receiving on here.

 

5-3 is a nice feeling... GO BILLS!

 

I think it's less about support, more about correcting some of the incorrect slights. No one is more disappointed by our play calling to end the halves this year than me. I hate it. I also think, as Joe B stated, that Marrone has more influence than most people think on the offensive play calling and rationale. Hackett is not a autonomous playcaller, and it'd be foolish to act as though his "firing" would eliminate our issues. Also, as we all know, our offensive line sucks. Not many plays will look good if no one blocks.

Edited October 27, 2014 by FireChan