Scott7975 Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 I think the Bills should draft a QB more often but people saying they missed out on Carr, Prescott, Wilson never bring up the non misses on the other 50 QBs they could have drafted in that span.
dave mcbride Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 @ringer Former NFL GM @mlombardinfl’s view on the surprise removal of the Buffalo Bills front office https://t.co/TpxcKKkzIM Awesome piece. Thanks for posting. Best thing I've read in a while.
Wayne Arnold Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 Awesome piece. Thanks for posting. Best thing I've read in a while. Yes it is. This piece should have its own thread, imo.
26CornerBlitz Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 Yes it is. This piece should have its own thread, imo. It does.
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 Whaley got screwed. What GM would succeed if they never got to pick their head coach? He died being a good solider.
BillsVet Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 Whaley got screwed. What GM would succeed if they never got to pick their head coach? He died being a good solider. Welcome to corporate America. If you're complaining about resources, you likely won't be complaining long. Whaley didn't have the perfect situation. He also had it far better, at least in resources, than preceding GM's who worked within RW's antiquated system.
Juice_32 Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 @ringer This is exactly how I have felt about the situation. I'm just not smart enough to summarize my thoughts this effectively. Thanks for posting. I have hope. Former NFL GM @mlombardinfls view on the surprise removal of the Buffalo Bills front office https://t.co/TpxcKKkzIM
Guest NeckBeard Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 I agree with that. I think he's been the best talent evaluator this franchise has had in a long time. But when you look at the collection of the players, there doesn't seem to be an overarching strategy. A big part of course is the coaching turnover, but that's also contributed to his demise. Other than Cleveland few franchises go through the lather rinse repeat players cycles like the Bills. Very good players should prosper in any scheme. I am still surprised that the org rebooted the FO... IMMEDIATELY AFTER A DRAFT. To me, this is an ownership issue above all else, and I say that as somebody who did not have a gigantic, um, fascination over DW's track record. So let me get this straight: the GM is completely blind to the fact that you are going to fire them, the GM and friends pick players and set the board, and nobody is concerned on any level that things could possibly go wrong? Wow.
3rdand12 Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 Whaley got screwed. What GM would succeed if they never got to pick their head coach? He died being a good solider. Or was he? Welcome to corporate America. If you're complaining about resources, you likely won't be complaining long. Whaley didn't have the perfect situation. He also had it far better, at least in resources, than preceding GM's who worked within RW's antiquated system. he had a lot of money he had to spend. Then Pegula Bills had always played tight with the cap and the FO budget too. Then Pegula . money everywhere. Whaley blew his nut to quickly. Sorry Ladies and sensitive types.. But Watkins Clay and Shady for EJM ??? hindsight perhaps. But that is where Whaley invested. I am sure he is very disappointed in the results of his tenure here. He also needs a clean slate. reboot. No anger here. Just part of the learning curve for the Pegula's et al.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 I agree with that. I think he's been the best talent evaluator this franchise has had in a long time. But when you look at the collection of the players, there doesn't seem to be an overarching strategy. A big part of course is the coaching turnover, but that's also contributed to his demise. Other than Cleveland few franchises go through the lather rinse repeat players cycles like the Bills. Very good players should prosper in any scheme. I don't think that's quite right. I would rephrase it as "good schemes allow very good players to prosper". NFL history is full of players who moved for FA money from a system that suited them to one not so much, and slipped. Very very few players play at the same level in every system. I also feel that there's a lot of revisionist history going on now. You say there doesn't seem to be an overarching strategy, I disagree - it's just that last year's strategy differed from this year - as you note, coaching turnover. For example this article http://buffalonews.com/2017/05/04/vic-caruccis-bills-analysis-star-system-extinguished-new-approach/ or the comments below: Or was he? he had a lot of money he had to spend. Then Pegula Bills had always played tight with the cap and the FO budget too. Then Pegula . money everywhere. Whaley blew his nut to quickly. Sorry Ladies and sensitive types.. But Watkins Clay and Shady for EJM ??? hindsight perhaps. But that is where Whaley invested. I am sure he is very disappointed in the results of his tenure here. He also needs a clean slate. reboot. No anger here. Just part of the learning curve for the Pegula's et al. totally fails to consider the context of some of the player acquisitions. In 2015, the Bills had just come off a season with a top-5 D. There appeared to be a strategy: we have a strong D, improve the offense and we're a winning team. And it had the statistics from D the previous year to back it up. So Whaley went all-in to bring Roman the horses that Roman said he needed: the TE, the fullback, the star RB. And the offense did improve markedly, probably as much as it needed to IF the D had been able to maintain. It wasn't Clay and Shady for EJM at that point. The Bills brought in the best vet QB they could obtain (Cassel) and the best 2nd tier FA QB hedging their bets. I don't think it's a case of Whaley 'blew his nut' too early - the assessment was that the Bills had a window of strong D, and they needed to spend to bring in the O to match it. The flaw in that assessment wasn't with player evaluation, it was with bringing in a coach in Rex who blew the whole D up and couldn't deliver. Who is responsible for that, don't know, doesn't matter now. I hope we wind up with a great, solid team now. It's possible. It's also possible that overall, the level of talent on the team will fall now that the whole host of folks ID'ing it left the building. I'm in "wait and see" mode.
3rdand12 Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 I don't think that's quite right. I would rephrase it as "good schemes allow very good players to prosper". NFL history is full of players who moved for FA money from a system that suited them to one not so much, and slipped. Very very few players play at the same level in every system. I also feel that there's a lot of revisionist history going on now. You say there doesn't seem to be an overarching strategy, I disagree - it's just that last year's strategy differed from this year - as you note, coaching turnover. For example this article http://buffalonews.com/2017/05/04/vic-caruccis-bills-analysis-star-system-extinguished-new-approach/ or the comments below: totally fails to consider the context of some of the player acquisitions. In 2015, the Bills had just come off a season with a top-5 D. There appeared to be a strategy: we have a strong D, improve the offense and we're a winning team. And it had the statistics from D the previous year to back it up. So Whaley went all-in to bring Roman the horses that Roman said he needed: the TE, the fullback, the star RB. And the offense did improve markedly, probably as much as it needed to IF the D had been able to maintain. It wasn't Clay and Shady for EJM at that point. The Bills brought in the best vet QB they could obtain (Cassel) and the best 2nd tier FA QB hedging their bets. I don't think it's a case of Whaley 'blew his nut' too early - the assessment was that the Bills had a window of strong D, and they needed to spend to bring in the O to match it. The flaw in that assessment wasn't with player evaluation, it was with bringing in a coach in Rex who blew the whole D up and couldn't deliver. Who is responsible for that, don't know, doesn't matter now. I hope we wind up with a great, solid team now. It's possible. It's also possible that overall, the level of talent on the team will fall now that the whole host of folks ID'ing it left the building. I'm in "wait and see" mode. I appreciate your PoV Hapless. But Bills went "Win Now " mental. At that point I agreed with it !! Now i feel it was likely shortsighted
GG Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 I don't think that's quite right. I would rephrase it as "good schemes allow very good players to prosper". NFL history is full of players who moved for FA money from a system that suited them to one not so much, and slipped. Very very few players play at the same level in every system. I also feel that there's a lot of revisionist history going on now. You say there doesn't seem to be an overarching strategy, I disagree - it's just that last year's strategy differed from this year - as you note, coaching turnover. For example this article http://buffalonews.com/2017/05/04/vic-caruccis-bills-analysis-star-system-extinguished-new-approach/ or the comments below: totally fails to consider the context of some of the player acquisitions. In 2015, the Bills had just come off a season with a top-5 D. There appeared to be a strategy: we have a strong D, improve the offense and we're a winning team. And it had the statistics from D the previous year to back it up. So Whaley went all-in to bring Roman the horses that Roman said he needed: the TE, the fullback, the star RB. And the offense did improve markedly, probably as much as it needed to IF the D had been able to maintain. It wasn't Clay and Shady for EJM at that point. The Bills brought in the best vet QB they could obtain (Cassel) and the best 2nd tier FA QB hedging their bets. I don't think it's a case of Whaley 'blew his nut' too early - the assessment was that the Bills had a window of strong D, and they needed to spend to bring in the O to match it. The flaw in that assessment wasn't with player evaluation, it was with bringing in a coach in Rex who blew the whole D up and couldn't deliver. Who is responsible for that, don't know, doesn't matter now. I hope we wind up with a great, solid team now. It's possible. It's also possible that overall, the level of talent on the team will fall now that the whole host of folks ID'ing it left the building. I'm in "wait and see" mode. Note that you've highlighted Whaley's visible personnel decisions, which most people agree is his strong suit. But the loud knock on him that's coming out now is his deficiency on the other parts of being the GM, which is more than just fielding the 53 man squad for the upcoming season. That role encompasses the full component of the football operation from players, admin & support staff and interactions with the coaches. When you hear talk of friction across two coaching staffs, it's no wonder that McD requested a clean slate.
jeffismagic Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 (edited) Note that you've highlighted Whaley's visible personnel decisions, which most people agree is his strong suit. But the loud knock on him that's coming out now is his deficiency on the other parts of being the GM, which is more than just fielding the 53 man squad for the upcoming season. That role encompasses the full component of the football operation from players, admin & support staff and interactions with the coaches. When you hear talk of friction across two coaching staffs, it's no wonder that McD requested a clean slate. The Bills insiders on this board have repeatedly dismissed the idea that Whaley couldn't get along with people. Marrone didn't get along with anyone, that is true. But Rex and Whaley never had issues. Edited May 5, 2017 by jeffismagic
BringBackOrton Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 The Bills insiders on this board have repeatedly dismissed the idea that Whaley couldn't get along with people. Marrone didn't get along with anyone, that is true. But Rex and Whaley never had issues. The personal friends of Whaley dismissed that Whaley shared any blame?
jeffismagic Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 The personal friends of Whaley dismissed that Whaley shared any blame? You are welcome to believe the Russ Brandon types more, if you like.
iinii Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 (edited) Still fired, the role of GM has changed. Today's winners are coach driven. The game is so specialized that teams need to be built to specifically fit the nuances of each coach's scheme. Whaley fell in love with talent and it wound up being his undoing. Edited May 5, 2017 by iinii
GG Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 The Bills insiders on this board have repeatedly dismissed the idea that Whaley couldn't get along with people. Marrone didn't get along with anyone, that is true. But Rex and Whaley never had issues. Say what? There wasn't a single rumor out there over the last two years that Rex & Whaley differed in their strategy?
BringBackOrton Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 You are welcome to believe the Russ Brandon types more, if you like. I always consider the source before accepting a "dismissal."
Rico Posted May 5, 2017 Posted May 5, 2017 The Bills insiders on this board have repeatedly dismissed the idea that Whaley couldn't get along with people. Marrone didn't get along with anyone, that is true. But Rex and Whaley never had issues. That only works if you believe the Bills "insiders" on this board are credible.
Recommended Posts