The True reason to fire McDermott

[kkim0904]

How about Daboll?  At least defense had few good games and McDermott can run defense.

[dave mcbride]

Just now, JM57 said:

Great post, but that takes me right to my next point on these guys. Every one of their offensive additions to this point has been a swing and miss. How am I supposed to believe they're just going to magically figure that out this off-season

I can't disagree with this at all. I guess my only rejoinder is that aside from Zay Jones, the guys they acquired were always intended to be time servers until they went in big on the offense. Bear in mind that Matthews and Benjamin were either at the end of or near the end of their contracts. I doubt they would have traded for Benjamin if not for the improbable fact that they found themselves a playoff contender halfway through last season. 

[John from Riverside]

1 minute ago, kkim0904 said:

How about Daboll?  At least defense had few good games and McDermott can run defense.

The fact that Daboll is not fired is what really leads me to believe that mgt does not WANT this team to be good this year

[ctk232]

2 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

And if they happen to find a coach who ends a 17 year playoff drought his first year, he needs to be fired too because......'we backed in' or 'got lucky' or 'Peterman' or 'traded away all our talent' or 'Mahomes' or 'blahblahblah......'

I think we lucked ourselves into the playoffs more than we played our way in, but still think McD should stay - not just for that reason, among other insanely logical reasons, but the team didn't get themselves into a position that we could luck into the playoffs all on their own.

Edited October 22, 2018 by ctk232

[dave mcbride]

Just now, John from Riverside said:

The fact that Daboll is not fired is what really leads me to believe that mgt does not WANT this team to be good this year

Daboll is not the problem with this offense. Bill Walsh himself would struggle to generate 10 points with this talent. 

[John from Riverside]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

Daboll is not the problem with this offense. Bill Walsh himself would struggle to generate 10 points with this talent. 

You are in fact correct

 

I am just saying that Deboll would be the sacrificial lamb if we truly were looking to win (imo)

[mannc]

5 minutes ago, JM57 said:

Great post, but that takes me right to my next point on these guys. Every one of their offensive additions to this point has been a swing and miss. How am I supposed to believe they're just going to magically figure that out this off-season

To me, this is the question that matters.  So far, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that they don’t know what they are doing when it comes to offensive football.  How long do they get to prove otherwise?  I’m not sure they are capable of fixing the mess they’ve made.

[ctk232]

Just now, John from Riverside said:

You are in fact correct

 

I am just saying that Deboll would be the sacrificial lamb if we truly were looking to win (imo)

While I, at least, need another year to pass judgment on Daboll, I get that many others are ready to move on for myriad reasons. I can certainly see the issues he has in playcalling, but the systemic issues of lack of talent, especially at the QB position can drastically stifle and suffocate an offense. Simply put, if you don't have a good QB you won't have a good offense in the NFL. Seems more obvious, but the emphasis is having a QB that can provide the foundation for a pass first offense, we don't have that. 

 

That being said, I don't understand if he had been an OC in the NFL before, and was determined by NFL organizations to not be a worthwhile OC capable of this level, why do we think he will be better with us? Obvious, "cuz we're the bills" answers aside - the logic of expecting anything different seems a bit baseless in that regard, and it's something that gives me trouble when I say give him one more year.

[Peter]

18 minutes ago, mannc said:

So you think Rex deserved to stay?? Wow.

 

Yes, I thought that the winningest Buffalo Bills coach in nearly two decades deserved to stay beyond two years and did not deserve to be undermined.

 

Fun fact, the point differential and the relative offensive and defensive rankings were worse last year than the year before.

[dave mcbride]

5 minutes ago, mannc said:

To me, this is the question that matters.  So far, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that they don’t know what they are doing when it comes to offensive football.  How long do they get to prove otherwise?  I’m not sure they are capable of fixing the mess they’ve made.

This offseason is huge, no doubt. There may have been five-year plans in the USSR, but there are no five-year plans in the NFL. Next season is year 3 of what should be a 3-year plan (4 years max). They have to nail it. To give them the benefit of the doubt a little, they have set themselves up pretty well in terms of draft capital and FA. I don't like the fact that they only have one pick each in the first three rounds, but they will probably be able to move back a little in the first (there are always qb-desperate teams) and pick up another second/third. The Colts' moves last year represent a good model, and their draft picks that they got from the Jets trade are good players. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/2018_draft.htm

Edited October 22, 2018 by dave mcbride

[Jerome007]

I was one of the patient fans. And since the dead cap space is horrible now, but it will flip next year, plus the draft picks, I was on the camp of let them prove themselves. But this 7th blowout in 24 games under McD is a firable offense - at the very least he should really feel some heat now. Like he's lost his immunity he got from taking the team to the playoffs last year and being a new coach.

 

And while I did agree with getting rid of Dareus, paying the same amount of money for an average player like Star doesn't fill me with confidence they'll pay the right FA next year. The QB handling, from choosing & shipping out McCarron, sticking with Peterman, no mentor or coach for Allen before Anderson, etc. Many huge mistakes.

 

BUT, all that said,  if the team keeps fighting he deserves to make it to next year. If the players quit on him, and they did last game, then sorry, but it should be over for McD. Next games will decide IMO. Or should anyway.
 

With this yet another blowout, Shady injured, Allen injured, now this serious talk of McD getting fired, this season has really gone to hell unless a cure is magically found. Getting blown out and quitting are not acceptable.

[Best Player Available]

3 minutes ago, Peter said:

 

Yes, I thought that the winningest Buffalo Bills coach in nearly two decades deserved to stay beyond two years and did not deserve to be undermined.

 

Fun fact, the point differential and the relative offensive and defensive rankings were worse last year than the year before.

Yowzer, It's getting deep in here. Get my boots. 

[Peter]

Just now, Best Player Available said:

Yowzer, It's getting deep in here. Get my boots. 

 

Facts are facts.

[SoTier]

2 hours ago, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

Gailey's offense was lightyears better  than this team in every position besides running back. I don't think he's trying to build a defense first team, so much as he inherited a team that already had most of the defensive pieces in place, and doesn't really need to be rebuilt like the offense does. 

 

This is simply untrue. 

 

The offense had most of the pieces in place except for a QB.  It had the best OL and WR corps that any Bills team has had in this century, and the WRs were all young vets.  They had a good pass catching TE in Charles Clay who could also block (a bonus), and one of the very best RBs in the league.  This group was good enough to be about in the middle of the pack in most statistical measures.

 

The defense had some of the pieces, namely a solid if somewhat older DL and good CBs with Gilmore and Darby.  Preston Brown was serviceable at LB.  It needed to improve the back seven.  It was not a clutch, shut down defense like it had been under Marrone and Schwartz but that was more on coaching than on talent.

 

McDermott stripped the offense of virtually all its talent and replace talented players with bottom feeders and career backups.  He did somewhat better with the defense because he cares about the defense -- and special teams.  In McDermott's universe, the offense is his red-headed step-child who always gets the crumbs.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

24 minutes ago, mannc said:

So far, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that they don’t know what they are doing when it comes to offensive football.

 

Which evidence would that be? How much time/effort has been put into the offense, while we're at it? How many picks vis-a-vis the defense? How about FA acquisitions?

 

[cgg716]

Talent argument has no merit, look what Gailey did in not nearly as soft a league. No misdirection on offense or even that many bunch formations,  a good offensive coach, like Gailey, would do such things to minimize his talent defecit. 

 

All that matters in the modern nfl is offense, it will become even more prevalent in future years. The regime has shown no eye for even replacement level offensive talent or most importantly a coach who can design plays and schemes to work around those defecienes. Defense is irreverent now, we need to get ahead 

[BillsMafia13]

10 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

This is simply untrue. 

 

The offense had most of the pieces in place except for a QB.  It had the best OL and WR corps that any Bills team has had in this century, and the WRs were all young vets.  They had a good pass catching TE in Charles Clay who could also block (a bonus), and one of the very best RBs in the league.  This group was good enough to be about in the middle of the pack in most statistical measures.

 

The defense had some of the pieces, namely a solid if somewhat older DL and good CBs with Gilmore and Darby.  Preston Brown was serviceable at LB.  It needed to improve the back seven.  It was not a clutch, shut down defense like it had been under Marrone and Schwartz but that was more on coaching than on talent.

 

McDermott stripped the offense of virtually all its talent and replace talented players with bottom feeders and career backups.  He did somewhat better with the defense because he cares about the defense -- and special teams.  In McDermott's universe, the offense is his red-headed step-child who always gets the crumbs.

This really hurts to read.  Right in the fan bone

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, BillsMafia13 said:

This really hurts to read.  Right in the fan bone

 

Except he's totally wrong. Just because something's the best the bills have had in forever doesn't make it adequate. Tell me, what's Sam Watkins done since he left?

 

 

[SoTier]

24 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I can't disagree with this at all. I guess my only rejoinder is that aside from Zay Jones, the guys they acquired were always intended to be time servers until they went in big on the offense. Bear in mind that Matthews and Benjamin were either at the end of or near the end of their contracts. I doubt they would have traded for Benjamin if not for the improbable fact that they found themselves a playoff contender halfway through last season. 

 

"Time servers"?  Seriously, in the modern NFL a team can't afford to wait around for two or three seasons to decide they're "ready" to start building the offense.  The Bills had a chance to grab a seriously good QB in 2017, and they passed ... for a DB.  Compared to franchise QBs, great DBs are practically a dime a dozen.. 

 

The Bills then shed talent to gather draft picks in order to trade up to grab the fourth highest rated QB in the next draft who's clearly a project, and trade up again to get another first round project, this time a LB.   They could have filled numerous holes on both sides of the ball if they had used all the picks they had collected on more than 2 players.

 

Now, they are very likely to be picking in the top three in the 2019 draft, maybe even #1.  What if there are no great offensive prospects worth a top 3 pick?  What if the Bills get the #1 pick, there's a consensus #1 pick, and it's a QB?   That's the Bills dilemma because they passed on grabbing a good QB when they had the chance in 2017!

 

In the first round, where a team has the best chance to find success, you cannot make need or predetermined "plan" the primary reason for drafting a particular player.  If there's a talented QB available at your turn, you take him and don't trade back in order to draft a CB to replace the Pro Bowl CB that you let walk in free agency because you don't believe in paying DBs or WRs the market rate for players at their skill level.

[cgg716]

In 1/3 of McDermott’s games they have lost by 21 plus, suggesting in addition to this offensive garbage the defense isn’t as far along as we’d like either.