Sisyphean Bills Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 So, did Whaley deliberately set out to build a wide 9 defense? Because that's not what they ran under Pettine. Is it possible that he got a little lucky that his personnel for Schwartz's D and a little unlucky that it didn't fit Rex's? And why does a GM take no responsibility for recommending a coach whose scheme doesn't fit his personnel? And why do we ignore the fact that Rex has a pretty consistent history of fielding good defenses? If this were his first or second year I could see why we treat this year's defensive regression as the only relevant evidence, but since we know he's coached good defenses for years isn't it possible, even likely, that the answer is a little more complicated than scapegoating Ryan? Hammer meets nail. The GM should take responsibility for being the football side of the decision to hire coaches who can't work with the roster he's built and building.
26CornerBlitz Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Hammer meets nail. The GM should take responsibility for being the football side of the decision to hire coaches who can't work with the roster he's built and building. Should he have pounded his fist down and yelled at the Pegulas? Besides that, the players played in a similar scheme in 2013 under Pettine.
FireChan Posted January 3, 2016 Author Posted January 3, 2016 (edited) Should he have pounded his fist down and yelled at the Pegulas? Besides that, the players played in a similar scheme in 2013 under Pettine. A similar scheme you have called overrated and not actually good how many times now? Also, that similar scheme almost got Nigel Bradham cut, sooo. I'd also like to pose you this question 26. Then let me ask you again. If your argument is that Terry and Kim loved Rex and hired him while making the GM feel like he had to toe the company line and lie about how he felt about the hire from a football standpoint, well I don't know if that's any better (in fact it sounds much, much worse), although it does absolve Whaley. Is that your contention? Edited January 3, 2016 by FireChan
Rob's House Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Should he have pounded his fist down and yelled at the Pegulas? Besides that, the players played in a similar scheme in 2013 under Pettine. Do you have ANY evidence at all to support this theory that Whaley didn't want Rex? Because it seems that by ALL accounts that Whaley, at a minimum, recommended Rex on his short list of candidates. Yet you and others keep repeating this seemingly baseless allegation as accepted fact. So where are you getting this?
26CornerBlitz Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Do you have ANY evidence at all to support this theory that Whaley didn't want Rex? Because it seems that by ALL accounts that Whaley, at a minimum, recommended Rex on his short list of candidates. Yet you and others keep repeating this seemingly baseless allegation as accepted fact. So where are you getting this? The Pegulas decided that they wanted the next HC to have previous NFL experience and decided Rex was there guy after the initial meeting. Study up son!
FireChan Posted January 3, 2016 Author Posted January 3, 2016 The Pegulas decided that they wanted the next HC to have previous NFL experience and decided Rex was there guy after the initial meeting. Study up son! Wrong wrong wrong. This is getting sad.
Rob's House Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 The Pegulas decided that they wanted the next HC to have previous NFL experience and decided Rex was there guy after the initial meeting. Study up son! So the evidence supporting your assertion that the Pegula's forced Rex on Whaley is that they wanted their next coach to have NFL experience? That's it? Two words: Fan Boy
26CornerBlitz Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 @haprusak Doug Whaley Pregame @WGRZ So the evidence supporting your assertion that the Pegula's forced Rex on Whaley is that they wanted their next coach to have NFL experience? That's it?Two words: Fan Boy Study up son and get back. I'll suggest some football books for you later.
Rob's House Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 @haprusak Doug Whaley Pregame @WGRZ Filing this one in the spank bank?
26CornerBlitz Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Filing this one in the spank bank? In Rob's House they don't know about football.
FireChan Posted January 3, 2016 Author Posted January 3, 2016 The Pegulas make coaching hires from the hip and overrule their football advisors. Doesn't that just sound great?
Rob's House Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 (edited) @haprusak Doug Whaley Pregame @WGRZ Study up son and get back. I'll suggest some football books for you later. You've offered nothing that anyone who even casually follows the team didn't already know. When pressed for specifics you deflect. And condescending deflection is almost as pathetic as a grown man with a fanboy crush on a football exec. If you have no factual basis to support your assertions I'll take your "study up, son" retorts as defiantly waving the white flag. Edited January 3, 2016 by Rob's House
26CornerBlitz Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 (edited) You've offered nothing that anyone who even casually follows the team didn't already know. When pressed for specifics you deflect. And condescending deflection is almost as pathetic as a grown man with a fanboy crush on a football exec. If you have no factual basis to support your assertions I'll take your "study up, son" retorts as defiantly waving the white flag. Wait??? Did you just use the word condescending regarding someone else? Oh the delicious irony. Edited January 3, 2016 by 26CornerBlitz
Rob's House Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Wait??? Did you just use the word condescending regarding someone else? Oh the delicious irony. Condescension when addressing a flimsy and obnoxiously presented argument with facts and logic is not remotely similar to condescendingly deflecting to evade and avoid a substantive argument for which you have no answer. Your logic game is weak, son.
26CornerBlitz Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Condescension when addressing a flimsy and obnoxiously presented argument with facts and logic is not remotely similar to condescendingly deflecting to evade and avoid a substantive argument for which you have no answer. Your logic game is weak, son. The Pegulas decided who they wanted as the HC of their football team and Whaley's still here with no czar is coming. Get with that logic!
G-Daddy Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Who is the guy with beanie next to Whaley in the picture?
26CornerBlitz Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Who is the guy with beanie next to Whaley in the picture? Kelvin Fisher.
Best Player Available Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Who is the guy with beanie next to Whaley in the picture? Could be a czar. they wear beanies.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 (edited) So, did Whaley deliberately set out to build a wide 9 defense? Because that's not what they ran under Pettine. Is it possible that he got a little lucky that his personnel for Schwartz's D and a little unlucky that it didn't fit Rex's? And why does a GM take no responsibility for recommending a coach whose scheme doesn't fit his personnel? And why do we ignore the fact that Rex has a pretty consistent history of fielding good defenses? If this were his first or second year I could see why we treat this year's defensive regression as the only relevant evidence, but since we know he's coached good defenses for years isn't it possible, even likely, that the answer is a little more complicated than scapegoating Ryan? Actually, I don't ignore the fact that Rex has a "pretty consistent history of fielding good defenses" I question the premise - that he has a "pretty consistent history of fielding good defenses" Team ranks during Rex tenure as DC (Ravens) or HC (Jets, Bills) [scroll down]: By one metric, Yards per Game, Rex has indeed had top-5 defenses from 2005-2008 with the Ravens and 2009-2011 with the Jets, top-10 defenses 2x (2012, 2014) and 11th one year (2013). Sounds great. But YPG are only one metric. Points per game is the other dominant metric - after all, to stop a team from winning, you must stop them from scoring points. By that metric, Rex's record is more mixed: 10th, 1st, 22nd, 3rd with the Ravens; 1st, 6th, and most troubling, recently 20th (2x), 19th, 24th with the Jets, 16th this year with the Bills. Bottom half of the league the last 5 years. When there's a big discrepancy between points per game, and yards per game, for a D, it bears close scrutiny. It means something. It might mean that the D is "all or nothing" - they get a lot of 3 and outs, but they also give up the big play, thus allowing points with not many yards. It could mean their ST sucks or their O gives up a lot of turnovers, leading to poor field position to defend. Or the fact that 5 of the 6 bad years on points per game are recent, could mean that OC's have "solved" Rex's D and figured out how to attack it. I simply haven't had the interest to dig into it. I don't think it's entirely O turnovers to blame when Rex has a bad year (a claim Rex's staff has made, "Geno killed us with turnovers"), because Rex had a good year in 2005 (10th on points) when the Ravens were 28th in the Takeaway/Giveaway ratio and his best year (2008, #1 both categories) when the Ravens were mediocre (16ht) in T/G. This year with the Bills, a poor year defensively (20th on yards, 16th on points so far) the Bills are 10th in T/G. So I don't quite know what to make of that, but it's not quite as simple as "Rex needs a ball-hawking 2ndary" or "Rex's D takes the fall when the O sticks them in bad field position with turnovers" - that may contribute sometimes, but it's not the whole story. The bottom line seems to be, Rex's history on D is actually spotty, and for the last 5 years in PPG it's been the bottom half of the league with no excuse about turnovers handy this year with the Bills. I don't give Whaley no responsibility. I believe Rex was a group hire by Brandon, both Pegulas, and Whaley. I think he charmed them all and persuaded them all to buy into him. I don't understand what evidence anyone has to think otherwise. But I also think there's an ameliorating circumstance for Whaley: I think Rex persuaded Whaley by saying all the right things, claiming he's not a scheme guy, he's a football guy, just give him great football players and he'll put them into positions to succeed (this belief is supported by Rex's published words in his new-hire and spring pressers). Rex may even sincerely believe that about himself, but his actions this year as HC and defacto DC speak against that belief as matching reality. He ran an undisciplined team with no apparent accountability, and no apparent adjustments when he must have seen that the players weren't executing for whatever reason (late plays, lack of buy-in, unsuitability to scheme, injury). Edited January 3, 2016 by Hopeful
Rico Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 So the evidence supporting your assertion that the Pegula's forced Rex on Whaley is that they wanted their next coach to have NFL experience? That's it? Two words: Fan Boy Filing this one in the spank bank?
Recommended Posts