Dan Orlovsky Praises McDermott, Comments on Josh Allen Criticism (Analytics Twitter?)

[BADOLBILZ]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree it could have been done that way. I have never argued otherwise. In fact I have argued against those who try and make out that McDermott and Beane took the only possible approach. 

 

But I just think a franchise that had been where the Bills had been was going to benefit from more of a blank sheet approach. Culture change is easier with people without the baggage and while you are right that there might not have been a lot of owners willing to sign up for the McDermott plan the Pegulas are the only ones that matter here and they did. If think the 'cancer' was Rex Ryan and I believe he damaged the psyche of the previous group of guys much more than was apparent to the naked eye. 

 

 

Yeah I don't think the psyche was nearly as damaged as people want to make it out in retrospect.   It's a very vague excuse used to advance the agenda of a new regime.   Not even unlike many other coaching changes here where the difference between new and old were exaggerated for effect.     Like I said...........it was a tear down job to indulge the new hire that was made by a well intentioned ownership group that is really just feeling their way thru the dark wrt their sports ops.   

[Magox]

15 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Yeah I don't think the psyche was nearly as damaged as people want to make it out in retrospect.   It's a very vague excuse used to advance the agenda of a new regime.   Not even unlike many other coaching changes here where the difference between new and old were exaggerated for effect.     Like I said...........it was a tear down job to indulge the new hire that was made by a well intentioned ownership group that is really just feeling their way thru the dark wrt their sports ops.   

 

That would only make sense if you don't buy into the "culture" talk.  This completely dismisses that element.  

 

It's an abstract concept which is why it is easily dismissed by some.    The Bills didn't want Sammy Watkins for a number of reasons and I think we can now pretty much all reasonably agree that they made the correct decision with him.  They did the same with Marcell, which is another decision that has borne out to be the correct decision.

 

They wanted to build the team their way.  Their way meaning they wanted their guys that they believed that fit into the mold of the team that they wanted to do.

 

I have no problem and never did and said as much over the past few years.  Philosophically I was all on board.  The question was, could they actually assemble the team, talent and buy in to pull it off.   So far, that is a resounding yes!

 

This organization still knows that there is much more work to do and little by little they are building the team the way they envisioned and thankfully the Pegula's have given them the space to do so.  

 

Next year, they will add another play maker on offense and my guess is that in one form or another they will go after another blue chip defender and a few other guys that fit the mold of players they want.  Meaning that the team, barring injuries will be better than the one they have right now, specially considering the thought that Allen will be even more improved next year.  He'll have another offseason to continue working on his mechanics and of course the game will continue to slow down for him.

 

 

McD/Beane are proving their doubters wrong and I have no doubt in my mind that they will continue to lead the Bills to multiple future playoff appearances and will lead this franchise to at least a couple Championship games.  This team is being built for January football.

[GunnerBill]

31 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Yeah I don't think the psyche was nearly as damaged as people want to make it out in retrospect.   It's a very vague excuse used to advance the agenda of a new regime.   Not even unlike many other coaching changes here where the difference between new and old were exaggerated for effect.     Like I said...........it was a tear down job to indulge the new hire that was made by a well intentioned ownership group that is really just feeling their way thru the dark wrt their sports ops.   

 

Hmmm. I think it was and I was saying this at the time. I think that group still had talent - and I always thought that first McDermott team had a shot at improving on the Rex record in 2015 and 16. The reason Rex was fired was because we underachieved. But I also think he had created a group that crumbled at the first sign of adversity. I don't think it matters that other ownership groups might not have signed off on that approach. The Bills ownership did.

[BADOLBILZ]

2 hours ago, Magox said:

 

That would only make sense if you don't buy into the "culture" talk.  This completely dismisses that element.  

 

It's an abstract concept which is why it is easily dismissed by some.    The Bills didn't want Sammy Watkins for a number of reasons and I think we can now pretty much all reasonably agree that they made the correct decision with him.  They did the same with Marcell, which is another decision that has borne out to be the correct decision.

 

They wanted to build the team their way.  Their way meaning they wanted their guys that they believed that fit into the mold of the team that they wanted to do.

 

I have no problem and never did and said as much over the past few years.  Philosophically I was all on board.  The question was, could they actually assemble the team, talent and buy in to pull it off.   So far, that is a resounding yes!

 

This organization still knows that there is much more work to do and little by little they are building the team the way they envisioned and thankfully the Pegula's have given them the space to do so.  

 

Next year, they will add another play maker on offense and my guess is that in one form or another they will go after another blue chip defender and a few other guys that fit the mold of players they want.  Meaning that the team, barring injuries will be better than the one they have right now, specially considering the thought that Allen will be even more improved next year.  He'll have another offseason to continue working on his mechanics and of course the game will continue to slow down for him.

 

 

McD/Beane are proving their doubters wrong and I have no doubt in my mind that they will continue to lead the Bills to multiple future playoff appearances and will lead this franchise to at least a couple Championship games.  This team is being built for January football.

 

 

 

That's THE false premise.   It's as if some Bills fans think that their team is the only one with a good "culture".  They aren't.   I'd argue that the Steelers organization during the Bills/Rex era had a much bigger culture issue than Buffalo with an anti-leader at QB and Antonio Brown and LeVeon Bell etc..    And yet they won a lot then and then the same HC who cultivated that unhealthy culture now is being credited for changing it without gutting the roster.   I could run down a list of teams whose rosters were considered broken by losing with a bad culture and a new coach came in and tinkered a bit and turned them into winners.   Creating a positive culture is not something only one coach can do or something that has to be done the way the Bills chose to do it.  

[dave mcbride]

1 minute ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

That's THE false premise.   It's as if some Bills fans think that their team is the only one with a good "culture".  They aren't.   I'd argue that the Steelers organization during the Bills/Rex era had a much bigger culture issue than Buffalo with an anti-leader at QB and Antonio Brown and LeVeon Bell etc..    And yet they won a lot then and then the same HC who cultivated that unhealthy culture now is being credited for changing it without gutting the roster.   I could run down a list of teams whose rosters were considered broken by losing with a bad culture and a new coach came in and tinkered a bit and turned them into winners.   Creating a positive culture is not something only one coach can do or something that has to be done the way the Bills chose to do it.  

The thing about McDermott is that he's managed to do it with sub-average QB play. That's genuinely hard to do. 

[Magox]

12 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

That's THE false premise.   It's as if some Bills fans think that their team is the only one with a good "culture".  They aren't.   I'd argue that the Steelers organization during the Bills/Rex era had a much bigger culture issue than Buffalo with an anti-leader at QB and Antonio Brown and LeVeon Bell etc..    And yet they won a lot then and then the same HC who cultivated that unhealthy culture now is being credited for changing it without gutting the roster.   I could run down a list of teams whose rosters were considered broken by losing with a bad culture and a new coach came in and tinkered a bit and turned them into winners.   Creating a positive culture is not something only one coach can do or something that has to be done the way the Bills chose to do it.  

 

Having the “culture” is not a white or black concept.   Every team has some level of “culture” and the teams with the more enduring success don’t all have the same flavor of “culture”.

 

The argument isn’t whether or not a team has it, it’s what sort of culture are you instilling and will it lead to enduring success on the football field.

 

 The Bills have their vision of what it looks like and truth be told I don’t believe it’s whether or not the player is a Boy Scout, I think it has more to do with whether or not they can buy in to what you are selling, be part of the family they are creating and work hard to achieve the teams goals.

 

As the team and organization begins to establish that culture they can deviate somewhat and add some players that are more talented to be a part of that culture because they believe that the organization can survive it, similar to the Patriots.

[GoBills808]

13 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

That's THE false premise.   It's as if some Bills fans think that their team is the only one with a good "culture".  They aren't.   I'd argue that the Steelers organization during the Bills/Rex era had a much bigger culture issue than Buffalo with an anti-leader at QB and Antonio Brown and LeVeon Bell etc..    And yet they won a lot then and then the same HC who cultivated that unhealthy culture now is being credited for changing it without gutting the roster.   I could run down a list of teams whose rosters were considered broken by losing with a bad culture and a new coach came in and tinkered a bit and turned them into winners.   Creating a positive culture is not something only one coach can do or something that has to be done the way the Bills chose to do it.  

Each situation is unique, every organization suffers from different issues, it's entirely possible the way McDermott and Beane went about rebuilding the Bills was the only viable way to do it. 

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Hmmm. I think it was and I was saying this at the time. I think that group still had talent - and I always thought that first McDermott team had a shot at improving on the Rex record in 2015 and 16. The reason Rex was fired was because we underachieved. But I also think he had created a group that crumbled at the first sign of adversity. I don't think it matters that other ownership groups might not have signed off on that approach. The Bills ownership did.

 

 

1)  And I'll still say it was just a terribly coached bottom quarter of the league defense that caused their .500 level finishes.   It's a domino effect.........poor coaching leads to poor performance regardless of effort.......and that leads to fatigue toward the task.   Fatigue makes cowards of us all.   Mental toughness is great but only if you are coached well enough to take advantage of it.  McDermott has experienced his share of games where players have outright quit on him.   Happens to the best(well maybe except to Belichick).   A good HC has to be on his game week to week and ready to do things to win back support/confidence.   Rex wasn't into that.  He wanted to work hard for the 2 NE games and the rest of the year it was delegation regardless of the temperature of the room.

 

2) It obviously matters to the discussion so trying to use it to bow tie a flimsy position is kinda' weak.   You can do better.

43 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The thing about McDermott is that he's managed to do it with sub-average QB play. That's genuinely hard to do. 

 

 

I don't know.......that's slope grease which leads to records versus teams with winning records and schedules and traditonally indicative things like point differential etc..

 

 

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

1)  And I'll still say it was just a terribly coached bottom quarter of the league defense that caused their .500 level finishes.   It's a domino effect.........poor coaching leads to poor performance regardless of effort.......and that leads to fatigue toward the task.   Fatigue makes cowards of us all.   Mental toughness is great but only if you are coached well enough to take advantage of it.  McDermott has experienced his share of games where players have outright quit on him.   Happens to the best(well maybe except to Belichick).   A good HC has to be on his game week to week and ready to do things to win back support/confidence.   Rex wasn't into that.  He wanted to work hard for the 2 NE games and the rest of the year it was delegation regardless of the temperature of the room.

 

2) It obviously matters to the discussion so trying to use it to bow tie a flimsy position is kinda' weak.   You can do better.

 

 

I don't know.......that's slope grease which leads to records versus teams with winning records and schedules and traditonally indicative things like point differential etc..

 

 

 

Explain to me why it matters Badol cos I don't see it. Every ownership would not allow a tear down. But the Bills ownership did. Isn't that all that is relevant? Well that and the question of would they be better off had they reloaded.... and I am not sure they would. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

17 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

I couldn't disagree more about the perspective..........the situation was perfect for what McD wanted to do.    There is a difference.

 

They could have hired a quality HC/man in Anthony Lynn and drafted Mahomes or Watson and kept Gilmore, Watkins, Woods  etc.. and very easily become a perennial contender.   

 

We've had some discussion about this before.  We clearly agree that there were other options for the team than the personnel strategy McDermott and Beane chose; they don't get credit for "Cap Hell" because they created it when other options did exist.  And I'm still not sold 100% on their offensive talent evaluation, though the OL and the WR/TE are improved this year.

 

Here's what you're certain of and I'm uncertain of: whether or not the culture in the Buffalo organization and locker room was toxic enough that they could have turned it around without basically blowing the thing up and starting over.  Losing gets to be a habit just like anything else someone keeps doing.  And it's hard to get new players and draft pics to buy in and prepare maniacally if you've got too many well-paid players and stars who are used to a more leisurely pace.

 

A close friend of mine is a fan of a book, "Good to Great", which profiles how a number of organizations became great.  One of the mantras of said book is that "Good is the Enemy of Great".  The author points out that if an organization is bad, there is motivation to rebuild it.  But if an organization is already good (or in the case of the Bills, persistently mediocre), the temptation is to make tweaks and embrace incremental change.   Yet if the framework to allow "Great" is not there in a "Good" organization, the tweaks won't really work to effect Greatness; things might improve a little, but will then regress to the mean.

 

I don't know if what McDermott has done has actually established a framework for greatness, or whether in a year or two we will "regress to the mean" again.  But given how many years the organization attempted to improve with that "incremental change" strategy and yet remained mediocre - I don't feel an incontrovertible argument for "very easily become a perennial contender" can be made. 

 

No, the guys who were moved out were not all locker room cancers, but a guy can be the wrong person to lead or embrace a culture change in one organization where a different norm has been the status quo, and yet plug seamlessly in to an existing, harder-working culture in another place.

 

 

 

[Dr. K]

29 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

We've had some discussion about this before.  We clearly agree that there were other options for the team than the personnel strategy McDermott and Beane chose; they don't get credit for "Cap Hell" because they created it when other options did exist.  And I'm still not sold 100% on their offensive talent evaluation, though the OL and the WR/TE are improved this year.

 

Here's what you're certain of and I'm uncertain of: whether or not the culture in the Buffalo organization and locker room was toxic enough that they could have turned it around without basically blowing the thing up and starting over.  Losing gets to be a habit just like anything else someone keeps doing.  And it's hard to get new players and draft pics to buy in and prepare maniacally if you've got too many well-paid players and stars who are used to a more leisurely pace.

 

A close friend of mine is a fan of a book, "Good to Great", which profiles how a number of organizations became great.  One of the mantras of said book is that "Good is the Enemy of Great".  The author points out that if an organization is bad, there is motivation to rebuild it.  But if an organization is already good (or in the case of the Bills, persistently mediocre), the temptation is to make tweaks and embrace incremental change.   Yet if the framework to allow "Great" is not there in a "Good" organization, the tweaks won't really work to effect Greatness; things might improve a little, but will then regress to the mean.

 

I don't know if what McDermott has done has actually established a framework for greatness, or whether in a year or two we will "regress to the mean" again.  But given how many years the organization attempted to improve with that "incremental change" strategy and yet remained mediocre - I don't feel an incontrovertible argument for "very easily become a perennial contender" can be made. 

 

No, the guys who were moved out were not all locker room cancers, but a guy can be the wrong person to lead or embrace a culture change in one organization where a different norm has been the status quo, and yet plug seamlessly in to an existing, harder-working culture in another place.

 

 

 

Great comment. I was in agreement with Badol's analysis of what was possible, and it bothered me greatly when McBeane ditched so many good players, but I've come around since then. I think the culture change McD has managed is very important, as important as personnel changes. 

[YattaOkasan]

7 hours ago, Magox said:

 

The Bills have their vision of what it looks like and truth be told I don’t believe it’s whether or not the player is a Boy Scout, I think it has more to do with whether or not they can buy in to what you are selling, be part of the family they are creating and work hard to achieve the teams goals

 

I agree it’s not Boy Scouts. I think they are looking for competitors. Josh is probably the best example as that dude will do whatever he can to win. I think they want guys that will putting winning over everything. Outside of that I don’t think they care what a guy does. 

[Scott7975]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

We've had some discussion about this before.  We clearly agree that there were other options for the team than the personnel strategy McDermott and Beane chose; they don't get credit for "Cap Hell" because they created it when other options did exist.  And I'm still not sold 100% on their offensive talent evaluation, though the OL and the WR/TE are improved this year.

 

Here's what you're certain of and I'm uncertain of: whether or not the culture in the Buffalo organization and locker room was toxic enough that they could have turned it around without basically blowing the thing up and starting over.  Losing gets to be a habit just like anything else someone keeps doing.  And it's hard to get new players and draft pics to buy in and prepare maniacally if you've got too many well-paid players and stars who are used to a more leisurely pace.

 

A close friend of mine is a fan of a book, "Good to Great", which profiles how a number of organizations became great.  One of the mantras of said book is that "Good is the Enemy of Great".  The author points out that if an organization is bad, there is motivation to rebuild it.  But if an organization is already good (or in the case of the Bills, persistently mediocre), the temptation is to make tweaks and embrace incremental change.   Yet if the framework to allow "Great" is not there in a "Good" organization, the tweaks won't really work to effect Greatness; things might improve a little, but will then regress to the mean.

 

I don't know if what McDermott has done has actually established a framework for greatness, or whether in a year or two we will "regress to the mean" again.  But given how many years the organization attempted to improve with that "incremental change" strategy and yet remained mediocre - I don't feel an incontrovertible argument for "very easily become a perennial contender" can be made. 

 

No, the guys who were moved out were not all locker room cancers, but a guy can be the wrong person to lead or embrace a culture change in one organization where a different norm has been the status quo, and yet plug seamlessly in to an existing, harder-working culture in another place.

 

 

 

 

This team did the "win now" thing forever.  It got them nowhere.  Yeah, they created "cap hell," but in reality they were against the cap with under performing players.  IMO they "created" it out of necessity.  It's hard to add talent to a roster when you already have high paid underperformers.

 

Plus, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors.  No one knows how any of these guys were acting or how any of them interviewed with new coaches.  No one knows how much effort these guys put in on the practice field.  Nothing.  That stuff is almost never public knowledge.  Some of these guys have been here through a bunch of coaching changes.  None of them panned out.  Perhaps their attitude was "yay another coach, another system, another losing team... wheres my check."  I mean we just don't know.  I wouldn't blame some of them for not "buying in" and really just wanting to move out of here.

 

Gilmore and Woods are really the only ones that have done anything after leaving.  Woods reportedly didn't want to be here, he wanted to move home.  Maybe Gilmore wanted out because he felt his talents were wasted and wanted to win?  Who knows.  Honestly, the only move I didn't really agree with was the Darby move. 

 

What I do know is this seems to be working.  The team collected talent or reloaded for many years and it got them nowhere.

Edited December 20, 2019 by Scott7975

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

10 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Hmmm. I think it was and I was saying this at the time. I think that group still had talent - and I always thought that first McDermott team had a shot at improving on the Rex record in 2015 and 16. The reason Rex was fired was because we underachieved. But I also think he had created a group that crumbled at the first sign of adversity. I don't think it matters that other ownership groups might not have signed off on that approach. The Bills ownership did.

This in spades, those teams quit in several games. The culture absolutely had to change.

[BADOLBILZ]

15 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Explain to me why it matters Badol cos I don't see it. Every ownership would not allow a tear down. But the Bills ownership did. Isn't that all that is relevant? Well that and the question of would they be better off had they reloaded.... and I am not sure they would. 

 

 

It only matters for discussion purposes.

 

It's a discussion point in the same way that discussing whether your regime is a success before you've won a championship is meaningless chatter.

 

I think they would have been a very good team the past 3 years if they went with Lynn and drafted Mahomes or Watson and tried to build around pieces they had.  Why couldn't they be an even better version of what the Chiefs have been?   But I'm not sure either.   None of us can be sure.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

It only matters for discussion purposes.

 

It's a discussion point in the same way that discussing whether your regime is a success before you've won a championship is meaningless chatter.

 

I think they would have been a very good team the past 3 years if they went with Lynn and drafted Mahomes or Watson and tried to build around pieces they had.  Why couldn't they be an even better version of what the Chiefs have been?   But I'm not sure either.   None of us can be sure.  

 

 

 

Indeed. It was possible to go that way. It was also possible to go this way and at the moment the results are encouraging. 

[BADOLBILZ]

18 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

We've had some discussion about this before.  We clearly agree that there were other options for the team than the personnel strategy McDermott and Beane chose; they don't get credit for "Cap Hell" because they created it when other options did exist.  And I'm still not sold 100% on their offensive talent evaluation, though the OL and the WR/TE are improved this year.

 

Here's what you're certain of and I'm uncertain of: whether or not the culture in the Buffalo organization and locker room was toxic enough that they could have turned it around without basically blowing the thing up and starting over.  Losing gets to be a habit just like anything else someone keeps doing.  And it's hard to get new players and draft pics to buy in and prepare maniacally if you've got too many well-paid players and stars who are used to a more leisurely pace.

 

A close friend of mine is a fan of a book, "Good to Great", which profiles how a number of organizations became great.  One of the mantras of said book is that "Good is the Enemy of Great".  The author points out that if an organization is bad, there is motivation to rebuild it.  But if an organization is already good (or in the case of the Bills, persistently mediocre), the temptation is to make tweaks and embrace incremental change.   Yet if the framework to allow "Great" is not there in a "Good" organization, the tweaks won't really work to effect Greatness; things might improve a little, but will then regress to the mean.

 

I don't know if what McDermott has done has actually established a framework for greatness, or whether in a year or two we will "regress to the mean" again.  But given how many years the organization attempted to improve with that "incremental change" strategy and yet remained mediocre - I don't feel an incontrovertible argument for "very easily become a perennial contender" can be made. 

 

No, the guys who were moved out were not all locker room cancers, but a guy can be the wrong person to lead or embrace a culture change in one organization where a different norm has been the status quo, and yet plug seamlessly in to an existing, harder-working culture in another place.

 

 

 

 

 

Honestly I think Marrone got rid of the "losing" culture.   We talked a lot about that then but once he left everything he did was viewed differently.   He also cleaned up a lot of their "availability" issues with better training which yielded healthy teams.  

 

The Rex teams were just badly coached/lead/trained.   One thing that is seldom acknowledged is that there was ZERO buzz around the Bills 2015-2016 issues being because of players.  There were some players with bad habits during the Rex era but that's standard in the NFL.

 

 Some coaches can take that and fix it on the fly.   They inspire confidence to create change.  McVay and Lynn did in their respective situations taking over difficult situations.   I think McD's sales job.........particularly offensively where he hired a BAD staff........was not as impressive so he felt like he wanted to or had to eliminate skepticism no matter the cost.

 

In the "process" McBeane just came out making a lot of bad decisions wrt personnel.   I get the idea of "good being the enemy of great" in business.  I've seen it and agree entirely.    But in actual application in the NFL.......a review of past records of teams that rose to sustained prominence over the past couple decades would show almost all made the big move after 8-8 type performances.  I've chronicled it on here numerous times before.    

 

But to paraphrase Belichick.........in order to be bad in the NFL you have to be making bad decisions all the time.   And they weren't all bad decisions........I've liked their drafting in round 1.........and they had a very active and successful free agent season this past winter.    That's enough to stay competitive if you coach at least one side of the ball at a high level.   Which they do.

 

But for discussion purposes...........what if you fielded a KC level offense with Mahomes but with a Bills-under-Schwartz or even Pettine level defense instead of the garbage KC had on D?  A SB title LAST year?    Contrary to popular belief Andy Reid was never an elite offensive coach until he got Mahomes so the "he couldn't have done it in Buffalo because no Andy Reid"  stuff is pretty unsupported.   It's just a discussion point but it's certainly fair to consider the path not taken when the Bills literally had the choice of guys like Lynn and Mahomes and decided to ACTIVELY decline. 

[HardyBoy]

On 12/18/2019 at 3:16 PM, Albany,n.y. said:

People who believe that players & coaches should study a stat sheet instead of getting the context right by looking at film.  

They don't care what a player is doing on the field, if the stat sheet says he's below average, he's a bust.  

 

Yeah, so that's not analytics as a whole, you're describing bad analytics. Those next gen player movement stats are analytics too. They show how much acceleration a player needs to get off the line and how much separation that player needs to have if you want to run a specific route. Then you can use that to see how long the line needs to hold up for, and how quickly the type of defender going against the type of player you have typically holds up.

 

That is analytics as well. Just because people are potentially using bad stats doesn't make analytics bad, it makes the stats bad. I would be shocked if the bills are not already looking at stuff like that for player aquisition and gameplanning purposes (I mean why the hell not: if there is anyone on the Bills analytics team on here, I can code in R at a high intermediate level. My dream is to break down silos and allow people to get into flow states to fast track growth of individuals, teams and an overall organization by looking at individual components in a holistic way, and finding connections where they are often missed by others because individually the connection points are thought of as insignificant, but big picture are the keys to bring it all together).

[BADOLBILZ]

17 hours ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:

This in spades, those teams quit in several games. The culture absolutely had to change.

 

 

A lack of "heart" as Donahoe used to call it or "mental toughness" as we call it now can be a real thing but I don't think you really eliminate that anymore.

 

I think McD has done a good job keeping the team focused and united but he isn't above it.

 

The epic defensive collapse in the middle of 2017 was largely a result of horrible tackling/business decisions.   I think decisions by management(Dareus trade and Tyrod benching) and really bad coaching(see Jets game) and the dog days of midseason took a toll on the psyche of the defense leading to a franchise record worst stretch of 3 games.

 

Last year.......forget about it they quit a lot last year.  I also think they showed a lot of quit at midseason defensively this year.    It's hard to get teams to give great physical and mental effort week-in-week-out for 16 games.  

 

The problem is not resolved it's in remission.   All coaches have the same problem.......the better they coach the less chance of it........but it still happens and they have to minimize the damage when quit sets in.  

 

Mid-season seems to be a particular weak link in "the process" where the staff loses some control over the effort button.   Not sure how they will iron it out going forward but I trust that they recognize it and be pro-active about it.  

 

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Honestly I think Marrone got rid of the "losing" culture.   We talked a lot about that then but once he left everything he did was viewed differently.   He also cleaned up a lot of their "availability" issues with better training which yielded healthy teams.  

 

The Rex teams were just badly coached/lead/trained.   One thing that is seldom acknowledged is that there was ZERO buzz around the Bills 2015-2016 issues being because of players.  There were some players with bad habits during the Rex era but that's standard in the NFL.

 

 Some coaches can take that and fix it on the fly.   They inspire confidence to create change.  McVay and Lynn did in their respective situations taking over difficult situations.   I think McD's sales job.........particularly offensively where he hired a BAD staff........was not as impressive so he felt like he wanted to or had to eliminate skepticism no matter the cost.

 

In the "process" McBeane just came out making a lot of bad decisions wrt personnel.   I get the idea of "good being the enemy of great" in business.  I've seen it and agree entirely.    But in actual application in the NFL.......a review of past records of teams that rose to sustained prominence over the past couple decades would show almost all made the big move after 8-8 type performances.  I've chronicled it on here numerous times before.    

 

But to paraphrase Belichick.........in order to be bad in the NFL you have to be making bad decisions all the time.   And they weren't all bad decisions........I've liked their drafting in round 1.........and they had a very active and successful free agent season this past winter.    That's enough to stay competitive if you coach at least one side of the ball at a high level.   Which they do.

 

But for discussion purposes...........what if you fielded a KC level offense with Mahomes but with a Bills-under-Schwartz or even Pettine level defense instead of the garbage KC had on D?  A SB title LAST year?    Contrary to popular belief Andy Reid was never an elite offensive coach until he got Mahomes so the "he couldn't have done it in Buffalo because no Andy Reid"  stuff is pretty unsupported.   It's just a discussion point but it's certainly fair to consider the path not taken when the Bills literally had the choice of guys like Lynn and Mahomes and decided to ACTIVELY decline. 

I don't think Lynn has done jack in terms of changing the Chargers' culture. Or their record for that matter. They are the same bunch of talented underachievers they've ever been. 

 

Reid, like it or not, is 100% an elite offensive coach. I firmly believe Mahomes without Reid isn't as successful (like if he had been drafted by Buffalo)...and Mahomes w/out Reid, Hill, and Kelce is definitely not as successful imo.