Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

So was Marv without Kelly. So was Walsh without Montana.

Exactly. He's cherry picking and it's ridiculous.

  • Replies 940
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

I think I'd take BB over Walsh ... But it wouldn't be an easy decision.

Can't go wrong either way. I'd take BB because he has been around for what Walsh invented and seen the league adapt to the new contact rules which revolutionized offenses. BB's knowledge of the game and attention to detail is second too none. I despise the man but if he was here in Buffalo for the last 15 or so years I'm sure I'd feel differently.

Posted

 

 

 

So was Marv without Kelly. So was Walsh without Montana.

 

LMAO

 

Walsh has no such track record. He was viewed as having revolutionized the game in his era.

 

Talk about cherry-picking statements.

I think I'd take BB over Walsh ... But it wouldn't be an easy decision.

 

 

We'll see depending upon how the Pats play under JP. My guess is that you'll be eating those words.

Posted

I think I'd take BB over Walsh ... But it wouldn't be an easy decision.

Thats fine with me.

 

I am not saying either you or I are correct.

Both are in the running generally speaking.

 

For me I think Walsh, like B.Ryan changed the game of football.

 

and I really do feel strongly about BB methods to push the envelope with the rules has been what has got him where he is today.

 

That still makes him genius. Just not the kind i can respect.

He has so many other qualities. it is honestly a shame i feel his character tainted by his method

Posted

LMAO

 

Walsh has no such track record. He was viewed as having revolutionized the game in his era.

 

Talk about cherry-picking statements.

 

 

We'll see depending upon how the Pats play under JP. My guess is that you'll be eating those words.

 

You see, it's kind of like this. BB has nothing more to prove. He's won as a DC. He went to the playoffs with a post-Kosar Browns team. And he has led the only sustained dynasty in the NFL in this decade. It's really that simple to a fan of football - as in the entire league and sport. Take off the homer/hater glasses and admit that BB is - at the very least - a top 5 HC in the history of the game. Or look dumb. Up to you.

Posted

Can't go wrong either way. I'd take BB because he has been around for what Walsh invented and seen the league adapt to the new contact rules which revolutionized offenses. BB's knowledge of the game and attention to detail is second too none. I despise the man but if he was here in Buffalo for the last 15 or so years I'm sure I'd feel differently.

I would not feel differently if I truly felt Bill was gaming the game.

Have pretty strong morals and ethics. I just don't externalize them so often

Posted

Thats fine with me.

 

and I really do feel strongly about BB methods to push the envelope with the rules has been what has got him where he is today.

 

That still makes him genius. Just not the kind i can respect.

He has so many other qualities. it is honestly a shame i feel his character tainted by his method

This absolutely nails it, as far as I'm concerned. Well said.

Posted

You see, it's kind of like this. BB has nothing more to prove. He's won as a DC. He went to the playoffs with a post-Kosar Browns team. And he has led the only sustained dynasty in the NFL in this decade. It's really that simple to a fan of football - as in the entire league and sport. Take off the homer/hater glasses and admit that BB is - at the very least - a top 5 HC in the history of the game. Or look dumb. Up to you.

so it is cut and dried? accept BB or be a dumb ass?

 

lol

this is why i love you gugdy

Posted

so it is cut and dried? accept BB or be a dumb ass?

 

lol

this is why i love you gugdy

I put a range!!! It's not like I said he's the best ever (although that's my personal opinion).

Posted

I put a range!!! It's not like I said he's the best ever (although that's my personal opinion).

:thumbsup:

I can poke at you a little. can i not ?

Posted

Well I have just read the last few pages from today, and a few of you are a little snarky today. No worries, but I believe we can hang with a Brady less team. That doesn't mean I expect us to win. That's silly.

 

We have a talented team and Rex is pretty good against rookie QB's. In effect he's a rookie carrying a clip board for three years just like we should look at TT as a rookie last year.

 

I can't predict a record for these games, but I wouldn't be surprised with 1-3 or 2-2. 0-4 is a real stretch.

 

If the Bills can't beat a Brady-less team...

Posted

If the Bills can't beat a Brady-less team...

I hear ya, Doc. But whenever two teams are evenly matched, which the Pats sans Brady and the Bills would be, I always give the edge to the better-coached team. I don't think I need to continue where I'm going ...

Posted

You see, it's kind of like this. BB has nothing more to prove. He's won as a DC. He went to the playoffs with a post-Kosar Browns team. And he has led the only sustained dynasty in the NFL in this decade. It's really that simple to a fan of football - as in the entire league and sport. Take off the homer/hater glasses and admit that BB is - at the very least - a top 5 HC in the history of the game. Or look dumb. Up to you.

 

LOL

 

Right, your opinionated way or the highway. Yeah, I got that much from you a while back.

 

You're right, on paper anyway. The problem is that your way of thinking, if BB tanks after Brady is gone, as I suspect he will, if IMO he's dumb enough to keep coaching in order to preserve his legacy as-is, then you and everyone else will be singing a different tune.

 

And yeah, only you and that hamster on that wheel inside your head would seriously talk about the "greatness" of a coach that in 6 seasons posted a 52-62 record with one lackluster trip to the playoffs with an entirely unceremonious loss to oust them and their 1st-ranked D.

 

To add some perspective to that, that's approximately a carbon copy of how Dick Jauron fared as a head coach.

 

So just keep talkin' partner. Time will tell, or it won't if BB resigns after Brady does.

Posted

I hear ya, Doc. But whenever two teams are evenly matched, which the Pats sans Brady and the Bills would be, I always give the edge to the better-coached team. I don't think I need to continue where I'm going ...

 

The Cheaters aren't evenly matched with the Bills. The only place they're better is TE and LB.

Posted

 

If the Bills can't beat a Brady-less team...

I don't feel that is a safe assumption Doc.

Weird the paranoia Patriots have draped over the Bills faithfull

 

The Cheaters aren't evenly matched with the Bills. The only place they're better is TE and LB.

and twice better at TE now

×
×
  • Create New...