Marrone may opt out?

[FireChan]

Going into year 3 they knew what they had in Fitz. He imploded in the second half of Gailey year 2 after teams began jumping all of his short throws and challenging him to go over the top. That didn't change expectations though. They had a good running game and an OL that didn't give up a lot of sacks and a 1000 yard receiver a solid receiving TE.......if they had an elite QB expectations would have been SB because it was thought that the defense was going to be one of the league's very best with the addition of two pass rushing DE's. The talk was that the Bills had maybe the best DL in football then. Let's not pretend Marrone invented the talent here. He basically hired a good DC and used Jauron-ball offensive tactics to narrowly squeeze out a 9-7 record. If someone would have told me that Gailey year 5 would have ended in 9-7 I would have said whipdeefrickindoo just like everyone else here. Their progress has been tortoise-like.

 

I'd argue the changing of schematics on both the offense and twice on the defense changes expectations. Especially when the QB position is considerably downgraded.

 

In a vacuum, 9-7 is not that impressive. In the recent history of this franchise, it is. I'm okay with it.

Edited December 31, 2014 by FireChan

[The Dean]

Yeah, veteran team. People think this team is forever young because they don't win. They aren't. They saw age related decline from 3 OL this season. Pears, Wood and Urbik. Mario and KW are 8 years in. Jerry Hughes is at the end of his rookie contract. Chandler is on the backside of his career. Cory Graham and Leodis were the two starting CB's at one point early in the season.....these dudes got years on them. They are an average aged team. They had 3 rookie starters. Not unusual, especially after a draft like last years. They aren't old yet but it is a mischaracterization to say that they are a "young" team. They aren't ever going to get productive 30 year old OL either unless they start getting some athletes to fill those positions. The guys that last in the NFL are the guys who were athletes to start with. A guy like Randall McDaniel can play for 15 years but lumper like Eric Wood has a far shorter shelf life.

 

Veteran team and young team can be two different things. There is little doubt the Bills have a young roster. There are actually measures of that. Last year the Bills had the 3rd youngest roster in the NFL. And their "snap-weighted age" according to Football Outsiders was 4th youngest. Interesting fact is, the three teams younger than the Bills had older, experienced QBs.

 

http://www.footballo...013-nfl-rosters

 

The Bills roster this year on cut-down day wasn't quite as young, but was in the bottom third of NFL teams. They were #10---but their average age (25.72) was only marginally older than the youngest team, the Rams (25.09) and far from the oldest teams in the league, the Raiders (27).

 

http://www.philly.co...oldest.html?c=r

 

Unfortunately I was not able to find an end of the year snap-weighted average yet this year. I assume Orton brings that average up, but then again the playing time of Henderson and Brown might tip it the other way. Figure in Dixon playing instead of Fred for a good chuck of the year and I suspect the Bills will still be among the youngest teams, on a snap-played basis.

 

So please, don't lie. You are above that BADO. They ARE a young team, by comparison to the rest of the NFL.

Edited December 31, 2014 by The Dean

[BADOLBILZ]

I'd argue the changing of schematics on both the offense and twice on the defense changes expectations. Especially when the QB position is considerably downgraded.

 

In a vacuum, 9-7 is not that impressive. In the recent history of this franchise, it is. I'm okay with it.

 

You can argue it but generally speaking underachieving teams get a shot in the arm from change. It's the bottomed out teams that struggle with it.

 

Last year San Diego, KC, Philly all made the playoffs with new staffs while Arizona should have. Buffalo kinda' crapped the bed and got an addaboy for it. The only one of those teams that didn't have a big QB decision to make was SD. The others chose/addressed the position and coached theirs better. The "significant downgrade" at the QB position was an organizational decision and versus Orton it's debatable.

[3rdand12]

T.Dean ,

you have brought forth and interesting point or two i noticed, again.

 

I perceive team age as something measurable i suppose.

 

Aaron Williams being successful after moving to safety , in his second year. Leodis McKelvin under Pettine getting his confidence and playing like he always should have Bradham coming into his own. thats the veteran experience coming together. And thats when it makes a game difference.

Give me a defense thats been together for three years and thats the veteran experience windfall.

The Offense is the Young inexperienced polar opposite. regardless of age.

There is no advantage to acquiring players until they get on the same page under coaching.

Look at Mario under Wanny.

I have digressed though.

Marone aint goin nowhere

[BackInDaDay]

Marone aint goin nowhere

 

okay.. okay.. but do you guys have to keep repeating that? some words do hurt, ya know..

maybe we need some sensitivity training here on TBD, to help you awful Marrone supportors understand what the rest of us are going through right now..

[The Dean]

T.Dean ,

you have brought forth and interesting point or two i noticed, again.

 

I perceive team age as something measurable i suppose.

 

Aaron Williams being successful after moving to safety , in his second year. Leodis McKelvin under Pettine getting his confidence and playing like he always should have Bradham coming into his own. thats the veteran experience coming together. And thats when it makes a game difference.

Give me a defense thats been together for three years and thats the veteran experience windfall.

The Offense is the Young inexperienced polar opposite. regardless of age.

There is no advantage to acquiring players until they get on the same page under coaching.

Look at Mario under Wanny.

I have digressed though.

Marone aint goin nowhere

 

Indeed, I'm not saying age should always be used as an excuse for failure. But it is what it is. Sometimes young guys can also be experienced.

 

And you make a good point. Many of our "young guys" on defense have experience. I'm hoping the offense catches up soon.

 

And I agree. I doubt Marrone is going anywhere this year. He earned another year to make it all work. If the team regresses, then buh-bye, most likely.

[FireChan]

You can argue it but generally speaking underachieving teams get a shot in the arm from change. It's the bottomed out teams that struggle with it.

 

Last year San Diego, KC, Philly all made the playoffs with new staffs while Arizona should have. Buffalo kinda' crapped the bed and got an addaboy for it. The only one of those teams that didn't have a big QB decision to make was SD. The others chose/addressed the position and coached theirs better. The "significant downgrade" at the QB position was an organizational decision and versus Orton it's debatable.

 

Well Philly had the fluke boy-wonder in Foles (who was sitting pretty on the roster and wasn't even started by his coaching staff until Vick got hurt) while the Chiefs traded for a solid QB who had previous winning experience (which I don't believe the Bills could acquire) and the Bills got a middling QB prospect first off the board at pick #16. Organizational failure? Maybe. Philly just got lucky. KC had numerous Pro-Bowlers after their 2-14 season and their overall talent was much higher than the Bills.

 

All of the teams you mentioned are watching from the couch this year, besides Arizona. Some rebounded heavily and then came back to earth. None of those teams have had a playoff drought or even a winning season drought as long as the Bills.

[1B4IDie]

 

Hey, it would be a good way to get a jumpstart in the 2-3 year process of firing Schwartz! I'd put Marrone's chances of surviving as Bills HC past next season at less than 50% right now. Schwartz is the type of re-tread, proven loser as a HC who would gladly take a job without the promise of a good QB and his candidacy only gets stronger as long as he is here and his D stays solid. I think you could switch coaches this year and NOT hire Schwartz but very likely still retain him as DC. Next year, I bet he would quit if Marrone was fired and he wasn't the replacement. His dues are accruing daily.

Proven loser?

How many seasons Did a Schwartz team make the playoffs?

How many seasons have the Bills made the playoffs this millennium?

[3rdand12]

okay.. okay.. but do you guys have to keep repeating that? some words do hurt, ya know..

maybe we need some sensitivity training here on TBD, to help you awful Marrone supportors understand what the rest of us are going through right now..

Please accept my apologies BIDD. I dont always think when i speak.

 

But if i get the chance to rub it in next season , i won't hesitate

; )

[BADOLBILZ]

Veteran team and young team can be two different things. There is little doubt the Bills have a young roster. There are actually measures of that. Last year the Bills had the 3rd youngest roster in the NFL. And their "snap-weighted age" according to Football Outsiders was 4th youngest. Interesting fact is, the three teams younger than the Bills had older, experienced QBs.

 

http://www.footballo...013-nfl-rosters

 

The Bills roster this year on cut-down day wasn't quite as young, but was in the bottom third of NFL teams. They were #10---but their average age (25.72) was only marginally older than the youngest team, the Rams (25.09) and far from the oldest teams in the league, the Raiders (27).

 

http://www.philly.co...oldest.html?c=r

 

Unfortunately I was not able to find an end of the year snap-weighted average yet this year. I assume Orton brings that average up, but then again the playing time of Henderson and Brown might tip it the other way. Figure in Dixon playing instead of Fred for a good chuck of the year and I suspect the Bills will still be among the youngest teams, on a snap-played basis.

 

So please, don't lie. You are above that BADO. They ARE a young team, by comparison to the rest of the NFL.

 

The Bills had the 3rd youngest roster back then but the only difference between them and NE was literally that the Bills had 3 very young QB's weighting down their number and the Pats had a very old Tom Brady. When you add 14 extra years to one position on a roster of 53 it changes those very miniscule number differences A LOT when the spread from youngest to oldest in the entire league is barely 3 years TOTAL. That had a HUGE impact on their initial number because a lot of teams have numbers skewed by QB ages. We went thru this last year. And it bears noting that those 3 QB's that lowered the Bills number weren't on the field much THIS year were they? Replaced by a 10 year vet. What good is that number if it doesn't reflect the the core of the team? This Bills team is in their prime. The fact that their depth is younger than some teams is a lot less important than their front line talent.

[The Dean]

The Bills had the 3rd youngest roster back then but the only difference between them and NE was literally that the Bills had 3 very young QB's weighting down their number and the Pats had a very old Tom Brady. When you add 14 extra years to one position on a roster of 53 it changes those very miniscule number differences A LOT when the spread from youngest to oldest in the entire league is barely 3 years TOTAL. That had a HUGE impact on their initial number because a lot of teams have numbers skewed by QB ages. We went thru this last year. And it bears noting that those 3 QB's that lowered the Bills number weren't on the field much THIS year were they? Replaced by a 10 year vet. What good is that number if it doesn't reflect the the core of the team? This Bills team is in their prime. The fact that their depth is younger than some teams is a lot less important than their front line talent.

 

Weighted snap count, BADO. Entire team. Yes the QB makes a difference in the average, But so do OL and LB etc, who play every down. And lets not forget a young QB makes a big difference to the team, compared to an older experienced vet. So, in short, they were, and are, a young team compared to others in the NFL. That is both on their roster and weighted snap count. You can try to explain it away, but don't say it isn't true. It is.

 

With that said, I don't accept it as a reason for failure year-after-year. However if they continue to make measured progress and become a factor in the NFL playoffs once again, it might be considered a legit factor in the explanation of their growth.

[BADOLBILZ]

Well Philly had the fluke boy-wonder in Foles (who was sitting pretty on the roster and wasn't even started by his coaching staff until Vick got hurt) while the Chiefs traded for a solid QB who had previous winning experience (which I don't believe the Bills could acquire) and the Bills got a middling QB prospect first off the board at pick #16. Organizational failure? Maybe. Philly just got lucky. KC had numerous Pro-Bowlers after their 2-14 season and their overall talent was much higher than the Bills.

 

All of the teams you mentioned are watching from the couch this year, besides Arizona. Some rebounded heavily and then came back to earth. None of those teams have had a playoff drought or even a winning season drought as long as the Bills.

 

SD and KC were in it until the end and Philly still had a better year than them and a very good offense even with Mark Sanchez replacing the injured Foles. And of course there is Arizona who won 11 with a patchwork QB unit. Those teams didn't come back to earth......they leveled out and I attribute some of that to the edge lost in not being new. Your contention that new coaches and schemes are a detriment is an antiquated notion. In a league where every move is charted and recorded for use against you in future gameplanning there is value in change if the coaches are good. But whatever, same old excuses for losing. Excuses, excuses. The Bills didn't make the right decisions at QB. Next year when Derek Carr and Teddy Bridgewater are still ascending the excuses will be made why the Bills didn't get them when they could have. The excuses don't matter. It's the results. You make the right moves and win or make the wrong ones and lose. When everyone else starts missing the playoffs for 15 years then we can discuss the randomness of it all.

Edited December 31, 2014 by BADOLBEELZ

[FireChan]

SD and KC were in it until the end and Philly still had a better year than them and a very good offense even with Mark Sanchez replacing the injured Foles. And of course there is Arizona who won 11 with a patchwork QB unit. Those teams didn't come back to earth......they leveled out and I attribute some of that to the edge lost in not being new. Your contention that new coaches and schemes are a detriment is an antiquated notion. In a league where every move is charted and recorded for use against you in future gameplanning there is value in change if the coaches are good. But whatever, same old excuses for losing. Excuses, excuses. The Bills didn't make the right decisions at QB. Next year when Derek Carr and Teddy Bridgewater are still ascending the excuses will be made why the Bills didn't get them when they could have. The excuses don't matter. It's the results. You make the right moves and win or make the wrong ones and lose. When everyone else starts missing the playoffs for 15 years then we can discuss the randomness of it all.

 

Excuses matter. I get that results matter. But unless you are advocate a coaching and FO overhaul right now, there's no use complaining about excuses.

Edited December 31, 2014 by FireChan

[The Dean]

Excuses matter..

 

Only for teams not named Buffalo Bills.

[BADOLBILZ]

Weighted snap count, BADO. Entire team. Yes the QB makes a difference in the average, But so do OL and LB etc, who play every down. And lets not forget a young QB makes a big difference to the team, compared to an older experienced vet. So, in short, they were, and are, a young team compared to others in the NFL. That is both on their roster and weighted snap count. You can try to explain it away, but don't say it isn't true. It is.

 

With that said, I don't accept it as a reason for failure year-after-year. However if they continue to make measured progress and become a factor in the NFL playoffs once again, it might be considered a legit factor in the explanation of their growth.

 

Ok let me put it to you another way. What is the identity of the Bills and is it a center of youth? Mario Williams, Kyle Williams, Jerry Hughes(FA) and Marcel Dareus. That is the answer. Not to discount the rest of the team, but remove one of those players and the results start looking a lot different for your weighted average players at LB and in the secondary. This team is VERY reliant on one unit. But then look at the offense. The 3 most important players..by a lot... were Watkins, Orton and Fred Jackson. Not exactly spearheaded by youth. Look at the Seahawks by contrast. Their strength is their defense and they are young at their key positions. In Buffalo we would still be willing to be in excuse mode for why players that age weren't dominating yet. Their identity on offense is not the running game any more.....it's their QB Russell Wilson. Young. I am not saying the Bills are old. But they aren't a young team either. I am glad you don't see youth as an excuse but a lot of other people do. There were people on here last year that thought the Bills OL was young. 28 ain't young if you aren't an athlete in the NFL. That's why a guy like Wood got old faster than people expected. These are factors. Their time is now and the near future. Beyond that is anyone's guess.

 

Only for teams not named Buffalo Bills.

 

13 losing years in the past 15. Nary a playoff appearance. Am I missing something? OHHHH. Compassion for losers. Got it. I'll work on that.

[dpberr]

A lot of the teams with openings have terrible or very fickle ownership.

 

Id be stunned if he opted out from Buffalo in favor of the Yorks, McCaskeys and Johnsons of the NFL universe.

[FireChan]

13 losing years in the past 15. Nary a playoff appearance. Am I missing something? OHHHH. Compassion for losers. Got it. I'll work on that.

 

And a year ago you could have said 10 straight losing records.

[BackInDaDay]

Please accept my apologies BIDD. I dont always think when i speak.

 

But if i get the chance to rub it in next season , i won't hesitate

; )

apology accepted, and i'll be looking forward to it!

[The Dean]

Ok let me put it to you another way. What is the identity of the Bills and is it a center of youth? Mario Williams, Kyle Williams, Jerry Hughes(FA) and Marcel Dareus. That is the answer. Not to discount the rest of the team, but remove one of those players and the results start looking a lot different for your weighted average players at LB and in the secondary. This team is VERY reliant on one unit. But then look at the offense. The 3 most important players..by a lot... were Watkins, Orton and Fred Jackson. Not exactly spearheaded by youth. Look at the Seahawks by contrast. Their strength is their defense and they are young at their key positions. In Buffalo we would still be willing to be in excuse mode for why players that age weren't dominating yet. Their identity on offense is not the running game any more.....it's their QB Russell Wilson. Young. I am not saying the Bills are old. But they aren't a young team either. I am glad you don't see youth as an excuse but a lot of other people do. There were people on here last year that thought the Bills OL was young. 28 ain't young if you aren't an athlete in the NFL. That's why a guy like Wood got old faster than people expected. These are factors. Their time is now and the near future. Beyond that is anyone's guess.

 

 

 

13 losing years in the past 15. Nary a playoff appearance. Am I missing something? OHHHH. Compassion for losers. Got it. I'll work on that.

 

Here's the thing, BADO, they ARE a young team (relative to the rest of the league). It is fact. You just can't find a way to admit it.

 

And while the Bills have many, many years of failure. The current front office only has two-three years. You can't put those past failures on them. The name of the company doesn't reflect those currently in charge, especially if you see improvement. Those 15 years have been the combined failures of many different leaders. Go ahead and put the blame on Ralph if that makes you feel better. But how can you hang 15 years of failure on guys who have been here 2-3 years, and an owner who just took over the team months ago. I understand many fans are stupid and can't figure out a way to separate the team from those running the team. But you aren't. Forget the past 15 years. Start the clock at two, three years ago---and then perhaps, reset it for the new owner. Wallowing in the past gets you nowhere.

[BillsVet]

Ok let me put it to you another way. What is the identity of the Bills and is it a center of youth?

 

I'm still not clear the lead football guys, Whaley as top personnel guy and Marrone as HC, have moved any closer in 2 seasons toward establishing an identity that'll work in today's NFL. At yesterday's PC, Marrone talked how they wanted to maintain their defensive success and improve the special teams play. So they picked up more talent to help Crossman and some contributors to solidify the defense. Mission accomplished I guess.

 

Yet, only after talking defense and ST did Marrone get around to talking about the offense and specified reducing turnovers as a goal. That's wonderful in theory, but if it means (as I suspect it does) they'll try to accomplish this with fewer throws downfield then what era does Marrone think this is?

 

No one's winning in the NFL of 2014 with good defense, good ST play, and a safe conservative offense that tries to nickel and dime opponents. Heck, everyone's offensive focused, even Belichick and the Steelers seem to be offense first now. And the best I can see this team going with their "plan" is 9-7. It's the latest incarnation of Jauron ball, only this time they had more on offense and a better defense. What good is it to straddle the line between mediocrity and average?

 

I suppose someone will say that they don't have a QB or a better OL and that's why they're not good offensively. Well, 2 years in that's the wrong answer and the fault lies with the GM and HC who've now gone through 2 QBs and are no closer to a long term answer than they were in early 2013.

Edited December 31, 2014 by BillsVet