How long to close the competitive gap?

[Chris66]

If I was betting 8-8 would be my over /under. 

[LSHMEAB]

16 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

Closing the Gap means joining the small crowd of superior teams. Bouncing around between 6-10 and 10-6 without ever winning playoff games makes you the Bengals. 

I think many of us are thinking about this in a regime specific way.

 

It wouldn't be ideal to go 10-6 and get bounced in the first round, but it would certainly be enough to warrant hope for the future and continuity with the FO/Coaching staff.

 

Anything less than 9 wins and the ownership should seriously consider the direction of the team.

[teef]

6 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Teef at no point did I even CONSIDER that you would read that post.

 

You are a self-assured, smug know-it-all (I'm guessing that applies to most topics)......who is conveniently above discussing-it-all.

 

i will be more than happy to discuss anything you want, (and i do feel a lot of your points are good) but you're completely fabricating what was said.  there's just no argument to be had on this one.

[row_33]

14 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

See the Rams and Bears.

 

Its true. Hence why I said if the offense is still a struggle and he team goes 8-8 or so next year I would fire McDermott .

 

every year teams do a lot better and a lot worse than expected

 

the Pats means the Bills start 0-2, so getting to 11 wins is a lot harder compared to teams in a joke of a divisino

 

[LSHMEAB]

15 hours ago, Tcali said:

so true. the bills are in eternal rebuildland. eternal mediocrity. new generations of optimists who turn bitter and cynical over time.

Story of my life. I was the ultimate optimist in my early 20's. I'd make these people look like harsh cynics. Not quite sure how fans 35+ years old remain all hopey changy.

[HomeskillitMoorman]

2 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

every year teams do a lot better and a lot worse than expected

 

the Pats means the Bills start 0-2, so getting to 11 wins is a lot harder compared to teams in a joke of a divisino

 

 

If we actually improve significantly, which should be expected in Year 3, the Pats shouldn't automatically mean we're starting 0-2. It would be a huge disappointment if we're not way more competitive in those games. People can say whatever about the score of especially that first game in Buffalo, but the Pats were in control that whole game. I never thought we were going to win. All of that needs to change. 

Edited January 14, 2019 by HomeskillitMoorman

[BADOLBILZ]

4 minutes ago, Chris66 said:

That interesting. Wgr had a miami beat guy on this morning and he was talking about the potential hire of Flores. He stated he wasnt worried about it because coaches during rebuilds get fired before said teams become contenders.

 

 

Yeah I think most folks are making the mistake of thinking that McD being gone would mean another tear down.

 

If he doesn't prove himself capable to throwing down with the league's best coaches.........he can be replaced and the new guy can win right away.

 

That beat reporter is dead on about where Miami is at....................what you don't want is a coach who makes an utter mess of everything and leaves the cupboard bare.........like Dick Jauron eventually did.

 

But Jauron did a bang up job cleaning up Mularkey's mess in his first year.........what McD has done as a Bill in his first two years is create a VERY similar foundation that a better coach could build upon.

 

So it's not an auto-re-start if McD doesn't overcome his issues and raise his game...........the Pegula's just need to be ready to replace him if necessary..........before those issues start trending the team downward the way Jauron's did. 

[Virgil]

3 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

I'm not sure why anyone would be happy with 8-8, but Bills fans are so scared of expectations it's not surprising.

 

Why is it so ridiculous to expect a large jump like you saw from the Bears and Rams with their respective young QBs and teams from year 1 to 2? 

 

Only in Buffalo is slow, gradual  "progress" from 6-10 to 8-8 ok. 

 

I’m not saying I’d be happy, I’m saying I wouldn’t fire anyone over it.  

 

It’s not about the record, it’s about showing improvement.  You could argue we were better than our record this past year and worst than the previous one.  

 

You know a competent team when you see one.  Sometimes you win on luck too.  

 

Overall, I give them one more season to show improvement, record aside.  After that, I would expect to see playoffs or in contention each year. 

 

Again, I’d only expect to see a termination if the McDermott loses the locker room. 

[LSHMEAB]

9 hours ago, ColdFront_USAF said:

 

My feelings exactly. I was surprised how many people were all doom and gloom before the season and then acted like their minds were blown when we got blown out, or blamed Beane for the dead cap situation. 

 

Sure, he chose to create a good part of that dead cap. But he recognized that the longer we were hindered by big contracts on unwanted players, and a quarterback that was only going to win in very specific conditions (defense holds opposing team to less than 20, and a positive turnover differential), the longer we would be a middling team. 

 

Nobody knows for sure how this will end up, but you have to appreciate the balls our FO showed. It takes serious balls to take a qb that broke a nearly two decade drought and show him the door. It takes balls to strip the roster of problem players like Sammy and Marcell when they were two of the most talented players on the team.

I completely disagree with this assessment. By selling a complete rebuild to ownership, they've essentially bought themselves time. Nothing ballsy about it. Ballsy is coming in and saying we're gonna get this thing done quickly and this is how.

[HomeskillitMoorman]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

My point remains that next year isn't really year 3 of the rebuild. It is at most year 2. They did it a funky way year 1 but they got away with it and made the playoffs ending the drought. Then they embarked on the rebuild. They have to be better next year. They don't have to show they are a perennial contending type team.

 

This is one of the most ridiculous things that gets thrown around on this board sometimes. Yes, it is year 3. They did start the process in year 1, as they should have. And the Bills agreed they were still in the rebuilding process since they rightfully tore it down after 9-7 and a 1 and done with a team that didn't have a high ceiling. I don't know how that in any way wipes out a year of the process. The goal from Day 1 for any regime is to build a perennial legitimate contender...a mediocre season along the way shouldn't alleviate that expectation at all. 

[row_33]

17 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

 

If we actually improve significantly, which should be expected in Year 3, the Pats shouldn't automatically mean we're starting 0-2. It would be a huge disappointment if we're not way more competitive in those games. People can say whatever about the score of especially that first game in Buffalo, but the Pats were in control that whole game. I never thought we were going to win. All of that needs to change. 

 

did you see that yesterday?  That's the Pats ACTUALLY TRYING to do their best coming out of the gate. 

 

Against the Bills the Pats were cautious and waited for their opportunity to clinch the game easily and then laughed to the end of the games.

 

 

17 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

Lame excuse brother. 

 

The Bills go 0-2 against the Patriots every year because they are either out coached or overmatched talent wise.

 

Over the last 20 years the Dolphins have faired at least somewhat competent against them. Jets also had a string of years where they competed well with them.

 

***** split with them for once.

 

The Bills get absolutely owned by them year in and year out and it's been worse under McBeane to this point. 

 

 

so 11-5 is not happening if they get pantsed by the Pats easily twice

 

 

[HomeskillitMoorman]

2 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

did you see that yesterday?  That's the Pats ACTUALLY TRYING to do their best coming out of the gate. 

 

Against the Bills the Pats were cautious and waited for their opportunity to clinch the game easily and then laughed to the end of the games.

 

 

 

 

so 11-5 is not happening if they get pantsed by the Pats easily twice

 

 

 

Oh I totally agree, especially the game in NE was troubling because it looked like they were sleepwalking through it and it wasn't even competitive. 

[row_33]

11 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

I agree.

 

My point is stop getting your balls kicked in against the Patriots.?

 

yeah, it's easy according to experts on here, just put a little pressure on Brady, then he'll crumble

 

LMAO

 

 

[BADOLBILZ]

28 minutes ago, teef said:

i will be more than happy to discuss anything you want, (and i do feel a lot of your points are good) but you're completely fabricating what was said.  there's just no argument to be had on this one.

 

 

I did embellish what you said............but at this point in Bills fandom it should be sacrilege to suggest that change for the sake of change is in any way necessary.

 

I'd like to see somebody show me all the instances at the time of Rex Ryan's firing where anyone of note said that the roster needed to be torn down and the locker room blown up and that the likes of Watkins/Glenn/Gilmore/Darby/Woods were a big part of the problem.

 

Because that never happened.

 

The two topics were Rex sucking as a coach and Tyrod not being good enough as a QB.

 

That was it.

 

To paraphrase Whaley speaking for the Pegula's "7-9 wasn't good enough" with that roster.

 

McD created another narrative altogether because IMO he WANTED a less complicated slate(with somewhat lowered expectations) where his utter lack of HC'ing experience on any level wouldn't create a first impression that he could not overcome among the most powerful portion of the team,  the cornerstone young vets approaching or recently signed to second contracts.

 

Hence the purge.

 

I give him credit for making A LOT of changes to how he operates........he surely wasn't hired with the Pegula's thinking he would make Peterman-level miscalculations..........but at least he's adapted.

 

The question is whether or not he has another level he can get to as a HC or if he's just another Jauron/Gailey type who has risen to their level and that's it.

[GunnerBill]

34 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

 

This is one of the most ridiculous things that gets thrown around on this board sometimes. Yes, it is year 3. They did start the process in year 1, as they should have. And the Bills agreed they were still in the rebuilding process since they rightfully tore it down after 9-7 and a 1 and done with a team that didn't have a high ceiling. I don't know how that in any way wipes out a year of the process. The goal from Day 1 for any regime is to build a perennial legitimate contender...a mediocre season along the way shouldn't alleviate that expectation at all. 

 

I don't think it alleviates any expectation that they build a perennial contender. That is the aim that is the target and that is how they will be judged. But I don't think that if they were to go 8-8 in 2019 then you look at it and can say "well they have failed - move on". They tackled this thing a different way in 2017 than most regimes attack situations. They did not promise quick fixes and the Pegulas were bought in. If they are making progress in 2019 finish 8-8 and look primed to take a big step in 2020 I don't think there is any way at all the Pegulas make a change and to be honest, nor would I. Now by all means if they finish 8-8 and Pegula cleans house come back and tell me I was wrong. If he doesn't clean house and they go 8-8 in 2019 followed by 5-11 or 6-10 in 2020 come back and tell me I was wrong. For me as long as they are showing progress in 2019 (and I think they will be) they get 2020. That 2020 season would be the one that for me would become playoffs as a minimum or bust. 

 

And I will say again - I think it was possible to go about this job a different way. Indeed had I been McDermott or Beane I would have gone about it a different way from the start. But the Pegulas signed off on this approach. They went all in on this process when they hired them. I think when you make that decision you have to see it through. 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I did embellish what you said............but at this point in Bills fandom it should be sacrilege to suggest that change for the sake of change is in any way necessary.

 

I'd like to see somebody show me all the instances at the time of Rex Ryan's firing where anyone of note said that the roster needed to be torn down and the locker room blown up and that the likes of Watkins/Glenn/Gilmore/Darby/Woods were a big part of the problem.

 

Because that never happened.

 

The two topics were Rex sucking as a coach and Tyrod not being good enough as a QB.

 

That was it.

 

To paraphrase Whaley speaking for the Pegula's "7-9 wasn't good enough" with that roster.

 

McD created another narrative altogether because IMO he WANTED a less complicated slate(with somewhat lowered expectations) where his utter lack of HC'ing experience on any level wouldn't create a first impression that he could not overcome among the most powerful portion of the team,  the cornerstone young vets approaching or recently signed to second contracts.

 

Hence the purge.

 

I give him credit for making A LOT of changes to how he operates........he surely wasn't hired with the Pegula's thinking he would make Peterman-level miscalculations..........but at least he's adapted.

 

The question is whether or not he has another level he can get to as a HC or if he's just another Jauron/Gailey type who has risen to their level and that's it.

 

I agree. It did not have to be this way and you know I more than almost anyone called the Peterman mistake out from the start. But the Pegulas hired McDermott on Beane on the basis of hitting reset. They managed by hook or by crook to make the playoffs before really getting into full reset mode. To say it is now or never in 2019 is just a year premature for me. 

[nucci]

18 hours ago, BillsPride12 said:

Minimum of 2 years IMO..regardless of the cap space and draft picks we have, we still have so many holes to fill.  I think that the fans that are expecting 10-11 wins next year are going to be disappointed. 

I was told by many here that 2019 is the year to win...that's why they were ok with losing this year....now I have to wait 2 more years?

[nedboy7]

Who is a perennial contender in the nfl other than the patriots that you guys think that’s actually achievable??  It’s total BS. 

And...

if you really think this year was an improvement over the previous then I think you won’t have any problem with next year.  

[reddogblitz]

4 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

 

3 or 4 years should rid us of Brady, but they will still cakewalk the division with 9 wins if the other 3 don't get their act together

 

 

I'm sorry but this is the most pessimistic defeatist attitude of all on TBD.  We need to build up a team to beat them (the Giants did).  Beating them in their crib might be tough due to all the cheating they do there (cutting out headsets/radio broadcast in headsets/bugged locker room/spy cameras/deflated footballs  etc.).   But we should be able to at home. 

 

Even so, we don't even have to beat them to make the playoffs and even the division if we win enough of our other games.

 

Besides, to me the real difference is Bill Bellyache.  If Tommy retires and Bill does not, the train keeps rolling.  He's 13-6 in games with Cassel, Jimmy, and Brissett.  If Bill retires, things could change. but I'm not willing to wait.

 

Go  BILLS !!

1 hour ago, Chris66 said:

That interesting. Wgr had a miami beat guy on this morning and he was talking about the potential hire of Flores. He stated he wasnt worried about it because coaches during rebuilds get fired before said teams become contenders.

 

This seems to support the Bill Parcells' theory.  "The coach that is rebuilding is rebuilding for the next coach that comes in."

[reddogblitz]

54 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

I completely disagree with this assessment. By selling a complete rebuild to ownership, they've essentially bought themselves time. Nothing ballsy about it. Ballsy is coming in and saying we're gonna get this thing done quickly and this is how.

 

Is this thing on?

 

I agree. 

 

Losing is for losers.