NoSaint Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 no I did not miss it, I just don't know why it's such a revelation that would be case. He's just calling it like it is. It makes sense to me. Sorry I'm not more outraged! let me ask you this --- unless hes throwing his weight around or its been a debate, why even mention it? no one is saying you need to be outraged. just that the quote likely says more than you are giving it credit for.
boyst Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 WARNING - Against the grain: Could this be a good thing, in a way? Fuel to the fire of everyone? Maybe there is a bit of an attitude here, some bravado and pride with these guys that we haven't seen in a long time? Maybe that drive will work out better for both sides. I can only hope that eventually these concrete opinions and ironclad beliefs begin to merge together and provide a cohesive bond which could turn out to be very strong. The last time we had a coach with balls this big was Mularky. I don't know the last time we had a GM/FO like this - Butler maybe?
26CornerBlitz Posted December 11, 2014 Author Posted December 11, 2014 no I did not miss it, I just don't know why it's such a revelation that would be case. He's just calling it like it is. It makes sense to me. Sorry I'm not more outraged! to me it seems obvious. The media prodded and prodded. It is not a huge surprise that the FO would want to throw EJ in if mathematically eliminated. Media prodding and probative questions shouldn't matter. Marrone should have shown more media savvy, but it seems it was too much to ask of him.
YoloinOhio Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) let me ask you this --- unless hes throwing his weight around or its been a debate, why even mention it? no one is saying you need to be outraged. just that the quote likely says more than you are giving it credit for. I'm sure he mentioned it because it is a possibility it could change for someone else, like he said. Why would it not be a possibility it could change for Whaley if they are out of the playoff hunt, considering he's still in the process of evaluating EJ? At this point, Marrone wants to win as many games as possible and he thinks at this time Orton is the guy who gives him the best chance. He's acknowledging there is a difference between being a HC and a personnel guy. It is the reality everywhere. And not just with QBs. Edited December 11, 2014 by YoloinOhio
BrooklynBills Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 If Whaley survives the off-season and stays as GM I think he fires Marrone. They will all be gone IMO. Marrone because he is a poor communicator, his offense still doesn't do 1 thing even remotely well after 2 full seasons, and his mediocre record is almost fully attributed to the defense which he is clearly completely hands off. Whaley because he missed on the QB badly, the Watkins trade looks like TERRIBLE asset management, and not having that first round pick will likely cost the Bills a shot at one these established QBs that will be available this off-season. I think the only way Whaley stays aboard is if the Bills hire a star HC like Bill Cowher, Jon Gruden, Art Briles, Nick Saban(gasp!-yes, they should try), or Gus Malzahn and they make him the de facto head of the football department, much like Seattle did with Carroll. But even then, the Bills will likely want someone more versed in contract negotiation and salary structure than a guy whose background is college scouting. The league is trending to more CEO types in the GM role than former scouts.
GG Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 its not an important thing that im trying to blow up here but i really do hate hearing a coach reference "if i lose the next two weeks...." I guess there is an I in team.
BillsFanM.D. Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 It's be one of the worst moves in team history to get rid of Whaley. He's made his mistakes but for a first time GM, he's been damn good. He'd get hired in a second. I couldn't agree more. To be blunt...I'd be po'd if Whaley was shown the door. If Marrone is challenging him with this quote...he's foolish (IMHO).
Kelly the Dog Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 He shouldnt have said it. Again I think there are power plays and screaming matches between GMs and HCs on every team. It's impossible for two people to agree on 53 players. Its probably extremely hard to agree on 22 starters unless you're in the top 8-10 teams in the league. That said, Marrone seems like a dick, and it could be his undoing. He doesn't have the experience, record, or clout to be dictating stuff. Although, granted, Whaley should do all he can not to order players playing, and it doesnt look like he has so far.
NoSaint Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) I'm sure he mentioned it because it is a possibility it could change for someone else, like he said. Why would it not be a possibility it could change for Whaley if they are out of the playoff hunt, considering he's still in the process of evaluating EJ? At this point, Marrone wants to win as many games as possible and he thinks at this time Orton is the guy who gives him the best chance. He's acknowledging there is a difference between being a HC and a personnel guy. It is the reality everywhere. And not just with QBs. do you often say "i plan to have dinner with my wife tonight, unless she leaves me" or "i should be home by 6 unless my boss dumps a bunch of work on me" i know thats overstating it a bit, but its one of those things that most people leave without saying unless theres some tension/history there. and paired with his earlier "i went into whaleys office and told him i was benching EJ" comment - the preseason fights, the implications from the LA Bills backer event about whaley liking EJ and being surprised by the direction of the offense.... it seems to continue to imply that they arent on the same page at qb. yea, their jobs make that the natural case, for some decisions -- but... no raised eye brow at all from you hearing a comment like that? Edited December 11, 2014 by NoSaint
zow2 Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 I think there's a lot of assumptions in this thread about how certain people think/feel. All i know is if Marrone gets the Bills to .500 or better i don't think he's being fired (especially if they beat GB and/or NE). Around the league i bet it's a conclusion drawn by many NFL insiders that you cannot win in Buffalo. Maybe going forward this will change under Pegula, but to get a winning record here is a pretty major accomplishment.
eball Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 It doesn't really matter who coaches the Bills...they are going to lose most of the time. In-demand coaches who are seeking an NFL job know this, and will avoid coaching the Bills, Jags, Browns, etc. like the plague. I think the Bills would be no worse off giving Marrone another year. I think you take the Bills out of that conversation with the ownership change. What we're experiencing right now is the frustration of seeing a team loaded with talent, particularly on defense and at some of the skill positions, but with lousy QBs and questionable coaching. The Bills' job is extremely attractive, I would think. It's all about finding the QB, but with this defense you have the pieces in place to win with even marginal QB play.
Storm Front Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 It's all about finding the QB, but with this defense you have the pieces in place to win with even marginal QB play. If the Bills just need a QB to become winners, then there is no reason to fault Marrone and Co. as much as folks tend to do. If Marrone had Brees or Rodgers and the Bills finished 8-8 then I could see getting rid of Marrone.
26CornerBlitz Posted December 11, 2014 Author Posted December 11, 2014 Doug and Kyle have a chewing tobacco bond Hackett too.
Sisyphean Bills Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 WARNING - Against the grain: Could this be a good thing, in a way? Fuel to the fire of everyone? Maybe there is a bit of an attitude here, some bravado and pride with these guys that we haven't seen in a long time? Maybe that drive will work out better for both sides. I can only hope that eventually these concrete opinions and ironclad beliefs begin to merge together and provide a cohesive bond which could turn out to be very strong. The last time we had a coach with balls this big was Mularky. I don't know the last time we had a GM/FO like this - Butler maybe? Bah. I want a coach that will parrot the company line and fall on his sword at the end of the day. Winning is hard. Accept the losing.
boyst Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 Bah. I want a coach that will parrot the company line and fall on his sword at the end of the day. Winning is hard. Accept the losing. So who is more valuable? A gm who stands up for himself against the current? Or a coach? Asking everyone, not just you? Its refreshing but frustrating seeing this because its so new to us...
NoSaint Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 So who is more valuable? A gm who stands up for himself against the current? Or a coach? Asking everyone, not just you? Its refreshing but frustrating seeing this because its so new to us... i think it would be more refreshing if we believed the sum of those parts was resulting in greater success, instead of questioning whether the two are working in different directions on the offense. right now, i think its fair to wonder if they picture the offensive half of the 53 in the same way. if they do, then conflict getting there can be productive. if they dont, it could mean trouble stocking the shelves with pieces that dont fit.
YoloinOhio Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 Doug and Kyle have a chewing tobacco bond lol. Trying to picture EJ with chew. Can't do it. Tuel tho...
boyst Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 i think it would be more refreshing if we believed the sum of those parts was resulting in greater success, instead of questioning whether the two are working in different directions on the offense. right now, i think its fair to wonder if they picture the offensive half of the 53 in the same way. if they do, then conflict getting there can be productive. if they dont, it could mean trouble stocking the shelves with pieces that dont fit. That is what I was working up to and hope others chime in. Early on I seem to remember some conflict in Pittsburgh between Tomlin and the FO. Eventually, it seemed to get on track as the OC and others were weeded out and replaced a few times.
BillsVet Posted December 11, 2014 Posted December 11, 2014 After Saint Doug was given bad info on Manuel's knee late in the season, the coaches requested to hire new athletic trainers. Back in February it was leaked that Marrone and company were ultimately overruled. Not long after Brandon made it clear there were apparently no issues, Marrone changed his tune. Doug Whaley was nowhere to be found and this was before RW passed. So, it should be obvious that Whaley toed the company line, followed orders, and the coaches weren't happy. And people wonder if there's a divide? Which tells me that Brandon picked Marrone with perhaps some input from the GM. How could there not be dysfunction at OBD?
Recommended Posts