Maury Ballstein Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 Tyrods not Aaron Rogers and he takes up some cap space so some want to run him out of town. I agree, it's stupid especially when the alternative is a complete shot in the dark with a rookie that will more then likely be worse then Tyrod in his first year(and probably second). The logical thing to do is to keep Tyrod AND draft one high if a potential good one is there when we pick. He's not even Richard Rogers.
SectionC3 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 I too think that this "considering all of our options" is an answer you give when you have no answer. If Coach McD would like TT and the Bills would like TT, why the hell not do EVERYTHING possible to get the TT camp to restructure? The Bills camp may indeed WANT TT but do not want t tip their hand in the negotiations. If each side is waiting to see "who blinks first" of course this will likely go down to the deadline. Very reasonable point. Good post.
34-78-83 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 (edited) And it's also an assumption that they agree. I doubt anybody outside of the building knows the real story. For what it's worth, assuming that the franchise uses the committee approach, its easy to see how there would be friction with respect to this decision. This admittedly is speculation, but I can see how mcd might think that Tyrod is average, but also a better option than anything Whaley has suggested so far for next year. If Whaley is pushing cardale, if crossman (mcd's link to last year) tells mcd jones is lazy, and if Crossman tells McDermott that Tyrod is both a hard worker and respected by the players, then I can see how mcd would not be keen to stake his hc career on jones and would prefer to retain Taylor. Again, though, the point remains that all of this is speculation. Fair enough... They may disagree at times but when that happens they still come to a consensus. That's how it works. I do it all the time within my management team. Edited March 4, 2017 by 34-78-83
JM2009 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 It's a big football decision. Therefore, Russ should not have ANY say in the decision. End of discussion. The guy shouldn't be evaluating personnel. It seems like he still is though.
Buffalo86 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 (edited) There's just so much wrong with the following: As I reported in December, Buffalo’s decision makers -- general manager Doug Whaley, senior VP of football administration Jim Overdorf and team president Russ Brandon -- decided they didn’t want to pay Taylor in 2017. They wanted Taylor out as starter late in last season (he was shut down for Week 17 once owner Terry Pegula fired coach Rex Ryan), and that has not changed. The front office still feels the current salary structure they negotiated themselves a year ago -- instead of a more standard year-to-year, pay-as-you-go format -- doesn’t make sense... Edited March 4, 2017 by Buffalo86
Heavy Kevi Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 It seems like he still is though. Can't possibly be involved. People have been telling me for years he has no impact on decisions despite evidence to the contrary. I don't care how many times posters, Chris Brown, Terry, or Kim say that Russ isn't involved... I won't be comfortable until he leaves the organization altogether. Unfortunately I don't see that happening. Anyone constamtly making big decisions for the entirety of the drought should have been let go at the onset of the Pegula Era. I don't believe in positively reinforcing negative behavior.
The Frankish Reich Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 It's a big football decision. Therefore, Russ should not have ANY say in the decision. End of discussion. The guy shouldn't be evaluating personnel. So ... I assume the Pegulas shouldn't have any say either? Why not? It's their money! And Russ is their Bills money man. I see the criticism of Brandon being involved in other football decisions - for example, my opinion would change if a tape leaks in which Russ Brandon is caught saying "but I think Jay Cutler gives us a better chance to win" - but when we're talking about whether to commit a flatbed truck full of money to a specific player, I can't imagine a situation in which ownership (and ownership's proxies) wouldn't be involved.
K-9 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 Again, if the almighty meddling triumvirate of Whaley, Brandon, and Overdorf really wanted TT gone, I mean really wanted him gone, he would have been gone well before any new coach was hired, when there was simply no other opinion to be weighed. That simple. Then again, simple is often too complicated for LaConjecture. The simple truth is there is discussion taking place. There are pros and cons for both keeping and cutting him. It should be deliberated. Especially after a new staff has had a chance to perform an in depth analysis. It's too bad TT's play didn't put the issue to rest on its own merit.
FireChan Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 Again, if the almighty meddling triumvirate of Whaley, Brandon, and Overdorf really wanted TT gone, I mean really wanted him gone, he would have been gone well before any new coach was hired, when there was simply no other opinion to be weighed. That simple. Then again, simple is often too complicated for LaConjecture. The simple truth is there is discussion taking place. There are pros and cons for both keeping and cutting him. It should be deliberated. Especially after a new staff has had a chance to perform an in depth analysis. It's too bad TT's play didn't put the issue to rest on its own merit. Not if Pegula said, "no."
K-9 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 Not if Pegula said, "no." Sure. That's what must have happened. Pegula, in the face of the front office declared TT was untouchable. I wonder who Pegs likes at long snapper, too.
Manther Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 If there is a kernel of truth to this, a big if when if comes to LaConjecture, and the new staff prefers to keep TT and Whaley doesn't, look for TT to be retained and Whaley to be let go after the draft. Well, that just seems like a silly statement. But, I could be wrong.
JohnC Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 You don't think Marrone didn't have a big say on EJ? Marrone was looking for his way out and just tried to win as many games rather than try to develop a qb. I respectfully but strenuously disagree with your comments. No I don't think that he had a big say on the EJ selection. And that doesn't bother me at all. The GM and the scouting department are the segments of the organization that are immersed in evaluating the prospects. Was Marrone trying to win as many games as possible? Absolutely. That's his job. What do you want him to do work hard at losing so the team would have a better draft position? Of course not. I readily agree that Marrone rather quickly made a judgment on EJ that he was not good enough to be a franchise qb. Why was he so quick to make a conclusive assessment on him. What's obvious is obvious.That's why he was so adamant that Whaley get him a better option at qb. When all is said and done Marrone has proven to be right on his assessment of EJ. There are many warranted criticisms of the unlikable former coach but it shouldn't be for his correct assessment of EJ. Whaley belatedly had no choice but to acknowledge his mistake because it was clearly obvious to everyone who watched EJ in the games and on the practice field that he simply wasn't good enough to play in this league. My criticism of Whaley that is growing by the day is not mostly for making the EJ selection. It was a mistake that doesn't need to be continuously rehashed. My criticism is that this lumbering organization that hasn't had a franchise qb in over twenty years continues to be too passive (for me) in their pursuit of a franchise qb. Enough is enough.
K-9 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 Well, that just seems like a silly statement. But, I could be wrong. I'll stand by it. If it comes out that Whaley was against any decision to retain TT and complains about it, he will be gone post draft. He's on a short leash.
jeffismagic Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 I'll stand by it. If it comes out that Whaley was against any decision to retain TT and complains about it, he will be gone post draft. He's on a short leash. If the GM can't choose his players he should quit. I know I would.
Buffalo86 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 (edited) Sure. That's what must have happened. Pegula, in the face of the front office declared TT was untouchable. I wonder who Pegs likes at long snapper, too. It does sound ridiculous. Then again, if we're buying Pegula as the reason why Rex was hired, then it doesn't seem quite as far-fetched. Edited March 4, 2017 by Buffalo86
PromoTheRobot Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 So a few of you are working yourselves up into an anti-Whaley frenzy based upon a 'report' of questionable authenticity ? Is that a good summary of the last few hours of posts ? 14+ pages of breathless takes of unsubstantiated rumors proving Whaley is incompetent because he either wants to keep or get rid of Taylor.
FreddieJizzle22 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 It does sound ridiculous. Then again, if we're buying Pegula as the reason why Rex was hired, then it doesn't seem quite as far-fetched. Hey man! Good to see you here.
JohnC Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 This link was posted by QCity on another thread. I thought it would be appropriate in this thread. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/190614-bills-scout-blasts-the-front-office/
Buffalo86 Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 Hey man! Good to see you here. You too! This feels like a HS reunion, but with people you actually want to see.
Recommended Posts