Jump to content

10-23: Doug Whaley and Rex Ryan Pressers from London


Recommended Posts

I've only seen headlines in the online version of the local rag but they appear to want to place blame on Whaley for not having Pro Bowl quality backups for all these injured players. This is a common media approach. But blaming Whaley for trading Cassel is laughable, which I think was a headline I saw this week. If anyone think this team beats the Bengals last week with Cassel, all other things being equal, you're certifiably insane. But my bigger point is that one of the biggest fallacies in sports is the "injuries are no excuse" mantra. Really, you mean when the guy (Starter) who is better than the backup comes out, we are to expect equal play from that player? If the backup is equal, why isn't he playing at least rotating? Because he's not. When 5 of your backups play, should the expectations be the same? When should we accept injuries as the reason for a loss?

 

This game is the perfect test of the injury argument. I think the Jags win this game because injuries matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But my bigger point is that one of the biggest fallacies in sports is the "injuries are no excuse" mantra.

I agree big time with this. Add to it another fallacy, that player "X" should be playing through his injury because player "Y" played through theirs. The tough it out or you're soft crowd is ridiculous.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only seen headlines in the online version of the local rag but they appear to want to place blame on Whaley for not having Pro Bowl quality backups for all these injured players. This is a common media approach. But blaming Whaley for trading Cassel is laughable, which I think was a headline I saw this week. If anyone think this team beats the Bengals last week with Cassel, all other things being equal, you're certifiably insane. But my bigger point is that one of the biggest fallacies in sports is the "injuries are no excuse" mantra. Really, you mean when the guy (Starter) who is better than the backup comes out, we are to expect equal play from that player? If the backup is equal, why isn't he playing at least rotating? Because he's not. When 5 of your backups play, should the expectations be the same? When should we accept injuries as the reason for a loss?

 

This game is the perfect test of the injury argument. I think the Jags win this game because injuries matter.

 

Same with the "stop blaming the refs" fallacy.

 

Injuries and poor refereeing are arguably as influential as any play on the field.

 

Organized crime and bookies have known this for decades.

Edited by musichunch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000563609/article/whaley-bills-dont-regret-choosing-manuel-over-cassel

 

Whaley on QB's

 

On Thursday, Bills coach Rex Ryan told reporters that he would still trade linebacker Kiko Alonso for running back LeSean McCoy in "two seconds." On Friday, Buffalo general manager Doug Whaley showed equal faith in his decision to ship veteran passer Matt Cassel to the Cowboys in late September.

 

"No, not at all," Whaley said, when asked if he regrets dumping Cassel. "When you look at it, coming out of camp, arguably you could say (Manuel) was the No. 2. So we had the luxury of being able to come back with Cassel at a reduced rate and have three quarterbacks. If you look at the league, maybe a little over half the league have three quarterbacks, so it's a luxury. And then when (safety) Aaron (Williams) went down, we needed a spot -- and then the Cowboys called."

 

 

"I think that's debatable," Whaley said. "What we saw in the preseason, again, we felt comfortable with EJ being our two, and obviously we showed that by (moving) Cassel, but, again, that's something that you guys can debate. We believe that the level -- there was a battle ... we thought it was 2a and 2b."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000563609/article/whaley-bills-dont-regret-choosing-manuel-over-cassel

 

Whaley on QB's

 

uffalo general manager Doug Whaley showed equal faith in his decision to ship veteran passer Matt Cassel to the Cowboys in late September.

 

"No, not at all," ......"When you look at it, coming out of camp, arguably you could say (Manuel) was the No. 2. So we had the luxury of being able to come back with Cassel at a reduced rate and have three quarterbacks. If you look at the league, maybe a little over half the league have three quarterbacks, so it's a luxury. And then when (safety) Aaron (Williams) went down, we needed a spot -- and then the Cowboys called."

 

"What we saw in the preseason, again, we felt comfortable with EJ being our two, and obviously we showed that by (moving) Cassel, but, again, that's something that you guys can debate. We believe that the level -- there was a battle ... we thought it was 2a and 2b."

So much for some people saying that EJ was clearly the #3 guy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another quote from the Buffalo News story:

 

'On Friday, when asked if everyone was in agreement philosophically in trading Cassel, Whaley said I believe so, though added were going to have internal debate but we have external unity.'

 

That sorta indicates that not everyone was on board with the trade ...

Edited by dave mcbride
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only seen headlines in the online version of the local rag but they appear to want to place blame on Whaley for not having Pro Bowl quality backups for all these injured players. This is a common media approach. But blaming Whaley for trading Cassel is laughable, which I think was a headline I saw this week. If anyone think this team beats the Bengals last week with Cassel, all other things being equal, you're certifiably insane. But my bigger point is that one of the biggest fallacies in sports is the "injuries are no excuse" mantra. Really, you mean when the guy (Starter) who is better than the backup comes out, we are to expect equal play from that player? If the backup is equal, why isn't he playing at least rotating? Because he's not. When 5 of your backups play, should the expectations be the same? When should we accept injuries as the reason for a loss?

 

This game is the perfect test of the injury argument. I think the Jags win this game because injuries matter.

Case in point: Do you think the Bengals win that game on Sunday with Andy Dalton out, Marvin Jones out, Jeremy Hill out, Gio Bernard on a snap-count, A.J. Green out after the first half, RT Andre Smith out after the first series, and Safety Reggie Nelson out? That was essentially the position that the Bills were in. Injuries are certainly a valid excuse. Bill Parcells once said that the coaching performance he and his staff did back in 2000 with the Jets' decimated by injury (Remember Ray Lucas at QB?) to get the team to 8-8 was the best of his career.

 

Let's hope the team can get by the Jags in their current state and hope they get healthy during the bye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The history of OBD over the last 17 years is too focus fans on excuses for futility. This years version is injuries. Provides no real explanation for the regression of the defense or the complete lack of discipline on the field. But as long as the fans stay focused on the excuses, they can continue to bamboozle people into thinking management can build a championship contender, if it wasn't for the damn uncontrollable excuses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Case in point: Do you think the Bengals win that game on Sunday with Andy Dalton out, Marvin Jones out, Jeremy Hill out, Gio Bernard on a snap-count, A.J. Green out after the first half, RT Andre Smith out after the first series, and Safety Reggie Nelson out? That was essentially the position that the Bills were in. Injuries are certainly a valid excuse. Bill Parcells once said that the coaching performance he and his staff did back in 2000 with the Jets' decimated by injury (Remember Ray Lucas at QB?) to get the team to 8-8 was the best of his career.

 

Let's hope the team can get by the Jags in their current state and hope they get healthy during the bye.

+1 I'm not naive about the injuries but I didn't quite look at like that because our team on offense has so many new players that wasn't on the team last year so with them being out didn't seem so extreme. But you are right. No way the Bengals even put 14 if they were in the same situation against the Bills

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another quote from the Buffalo News story:

 

'On Friday, when asked if everyone was in agreement philosophically in trading Cassel, Whaley said I believe so, though added were going to have internal debate but we have external unity.'

 

That sorta indicates that not everyone was on board with the trade ...

 

I'm shocked that Whaley let that one slip. It's not something that a GM should say. It's a given that an organization should have external unity. The cynic in me thinks Rex is willing to bet the season to show that Whaley was wrong about trading Cassel away. If that's the case, Rex is in a no lose position, if EJ plays well, Bills are very much in the playoff hunt. If he doesn't play well, Rex has another leg up on Whaley inside OBD.

 

Never underestimate the egos in this business, especially Rex's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm shocked that Whaley let that one slip. It's not something that a GM should say. It's a given that an organization should have external unity. The cynic in me thinks Rex is willing to bet the season to show that Whaley was wrong about trading Cassel away. If that's the case, Rex is in a no lose position, if EJ plays well, Bills are very much in the playoff hunt. If he doesn't play well, Rex has another leg up on Whaley inside OBD.

 

Never underestimate the egos in this business, especially Rex's.

Don't really see it as a slip up. There were reports about Roman wanting Cassel from inside. I think it just reads worse than it actually is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm shocked that Whaley let that one slip. It's not something that a GM should say. It's a given that an organization should have external unity. The cynic in me thinks Rex is willing to bet the season to show that Whaley was wrong about trading Cassel away. If that's the case, Rex is in a no lose position, if EJ plays well, Bills are very much in the playoff hunt. If he doesn't play well, Rex has another leg up on Whaley inside OBD.

 

Never underestimate the egos in this business, especially Rex's.

Why? No one could possibly believe that any organization with more than 2 individuals ( if that) always has internal agreement on everything . So Whaleys comment is I big deal, except to folks who would just prefer to be lied to. " yep, we were all on board with the trade, and I'm not surprised because we always agree. " that would read like nonsense. I'm certain there were differing opinions, as trading Cassell carried some risk. Since his play wasn't enough to win the staring job, and he didn't look much better than EJ if at all, it was worth taking.I don't think Cassel would have gotten a win vs CIN, this game might be a different story. Still don't have a problem with the trade though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't really see it as a slip up. There were reports about Roman wanting Cassel from inside. I think it just reads worse than it actually is.

i dont think it's a competition between the coaches or staff. work with what you got and dont worry about the rest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Injuries are an excuse for Greg Roman. The offense has been decimated.

 

They do not excuse Rex Ryan.


i dont think it's a competition between the coaches or staff. work with what you got and dont worry about the rest

 

Not a problem this week. But when you are a part of the decision making circle and lose out on some decisions that later don't work....over time it has an effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...