Did Sean go too far calling out Mckenzie?

[Thurman#1]

10 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

As usual,  you are wrong.

 

Most long term successful regimes still lead thru fear and cutthroat personnel management and at the very least the HC's keep players a bit more at arms length than Sean McDermott.   

 

And relying on fear really helps Belichick stay on top of his X's and O's because he's not dealing with everyone's feelings and headspace every day.

 

McDermott has his hands full now just managing his teams mindset.     Especially now that they have such familiarity with him and feel comfy and cozy with all the continuity they've had.

 

It's not an accident that they might be the most inconsistent football team the NFL has seen in the past 40 years (as DVOA suggests in addition to the eye test).

 

As I've said though........Arians was dealing with very similar issues in Tampa last year.........but they got hot in the last 4 weeks of the season and went on to win the whole thing.   

 

One of my concerns is a coach like Arians really started to be perceived as a slam dunk great coach at his SECOND full time NFL HC job.

 

When he left Arizona his style wasn't getting it done there anymore.   When he went to Tampa it was like "hey, he won with Arizona for chrissakes" and then he basically had the old Marv Levy "if you get a reputation as an early riser you can sleep til' noon" thing going on where he could do little wrong despite flat out sucking early on there.  

 

Hopefully McD and Beane can figure out how to reign things back in before they have to go somewhere else to get the most out of their teams again.

 

 

As usual you're far beyond wrong into clueless and buried so deep into confirmation bias and wildly extreme pessimism as to be completely lost.

 

Belichick is as much dealing with everyone's feelings and headspace as any other coach. So that's utter crap. He doesn't avoid that area. He simply deals with it differently. Every coach who deals with human beings deals with headspace and feelings.

 

Being kind doesn't mean that McDermott needs to force himself to spend twelve hours a day asking everyone about their emotions and what their favorite Air Supply song is. Nor does Belichick avoid personal speech with his players. Everyone who's worked for Belichicks says he knows the names of their kids and spouses, that he fairly often asks about them and their families. You can be tough as hell and still have a human side.

 

Autocrats and nice guys deal alike with time limits. McDermott certainly deals with his players more respectfully. Doesn't mean he allows people to waste his time.

 

Plenty of nice guys have a terrific knowledge of x's and o's as well. Belichick is the best, arguably. There is zero evidence that's because he's an #######. Arians is a perfect example that a guy doesn't have to be an autocrat to be a very very successful head coach. Coughlin decided he couldn't keep the team as a martinet and mellowed out and that decision won him two Super Bowls and the ability to stay with one franchise for a period that felt like forever. And there are plenty more like them, like Harbaugh, Tomlin, and frankly McDermott though I'm sure he would agree he has a lot more to prove.

 

And really? You're trying to use the Bills over the last 40 years as evidence on McDermott? McDermott, who's been here for just over 10% of that time? Good lord! You aren't aware that makes zero sense, like none? The Bills certainly are inconsistent this year. Much less so last year. 

 

In fact there's not much evidence of your whole thesis, mostly because it isn't anywhere near black and white. Where does McDermott fall on the scale of martinet to ball of jelly? 76%? Belichick? Everyone's a mix of these qualities, but even without any specific research it's easily observable that plenty of players coaches have done extremely well over the years in the modern era.

 

Fair enough to note that some coaches become great in their second job, Belichick, Carroll and plenty of others included. Of course plenty do terrific in their first job. And plenty are probably terrible in their first job largely because the players on the roster at their first team suck and they luck into a Brady at your second job, as did both Belichick and Arians.

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Thurman#1

[Niagara Bill]

The only thing McD shows with his actions is frustration. He has found he has coached to his ability but that is not good enough. He has missed something and does not know what to do. He has become blinded, maybe with anger with himself. The eyes have glossed over.

His inability to lead under difficult times, under the pressure of expectations is a definite weakness. 

His tolerance is much higher than many, like Rex who fell after 2 games, but he is not in the class of Marv, BB, Shula, Parcels. Sometimes coaches with 10-7 records and win the big games are far better than coaches who are 13-4 with blow out wins and lose in the end. 

He has lost face and trust in the process.

[Bob in STL]

23 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

It’s funny people complain when he sticks to the script… we there you go. A real raw moment of unfiltered feedback on why decisions were made. 
 

McKenzie is a nice story, but precisely the type of spot on the team where we need an upgrade. 

Dawson Knox hurt us more yesterday than McKenzie ever has. Yet with the game on the line Knox’s number was called and he did not make a play.   Should Knox live in fear of not playing next week?  Of course not. 
 

Players being benched for mistakes is not new or wrong, but public discussions about it are never good.  
 

I am shocked at McDermott’s public comments on not trusting players. It seems out of character.
 

This has been a trying season and there are other puzzling comments by him, players, and coaches.  For the first time in McD era this team’s culture is not flattering.  It shows in their 0-4 record in games decided by one score.  No come from behind wins.  A 3-3 home record.  
 

I said this before.  This team reminds me of the 1989 Bills. A team that regressed after a big year, then emerged and became great. 
 

McD needs to hold the team together, treat this as part of the learning process, and get better in all phases of the game. The Bills are still a work in progress. 
 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Bob in STL

[Meatloaf63]

10 hours ago, ngbills said:

I really think there is something to this. The love has not been there all year long. 

I don’t think Daboll wants to be here. 

Do you think he has issues with McDermott or he just wanted to be a head coach?

[Mr. WEO]

He's a kick returner.  Why all the fuss?

[ngbills]

20 minutes ago, Meatloaf63 said:

Do you think he has issues with McDermott or he just wanted to be a head coach?

Maybe both. The issues were there but he expected to be getting a head coach job out of it so was on good behavior and was buying time. Or it could be he sees McD intruding in his offense and hurting his chances for a HC job. 

[Thurman#1]

3 hours ago, Niagara Bill said:

The only thing McD shows with his actions is frustration. He has found he has coached to his ability but that is not good enough. He has missed something and does not know what to do. He has become blinded, maybe with anger with himself. The eyes have glossed over.

His inability to lead under difficult times, under the pressure of expectations is a definite weakness. 

His tolerance is much higher than many, like Rex who fell after 2 games, but he is not in the class of Marv, BB, Shula, Parcels. Sometimes coaches with 10-7 records and win the big games are far better than coaches who are 13-4 with blow out wins and lose in the end. 

He has lost face and trust in the process.

 

 

No, he really has not lost faith and trust in the process.

 

What he did was he became angry. Your word, frustration, would also certainly be a fair one. That is about a level four of ten on a scale of response to bad events, with losing faith in the process being around a nine and a half with suicide being a ten.

 

That's his foundation. He certainly has not lost it. 

 

He has become angry. Not blinded ... though where you come up with this is completely unapparent.

 

Jeez the boards go nuts after bad games. And this certainly was an awful game.

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

28 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

He's a kick returner.  Why all the fuss?

 

 

Yeah, good question. 

 

McDermott sends messages, even in public, all the time. This is one of the harshest he's ever sent publicly, IMO. But when it comes to NFL-speak, it just isn't much.

 

I mean, McKenzie fumbled that without being touched. There was good reason for anger.

[Lfod]

32 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

He's a kick returner.  Why all the fuss?

Some are on a witch hunt I think. 

[Thurman#1]

15 hours ago, mattynh said:

He also misplayed the kick against Tenn which was not a fumble.

 

 

Yeah. McKenzie is really athletic, and he's really dangerous. But he doesn't seem to have good instincts as a kick returner. 

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but I was happy in this game to see one of our heady safeties dealing with the kicks in that wind rather than McKenzie.

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Thurman#1

[SectionC3]

27 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Yeah. McKenzie is really athletic, and he's really dangerous. But he doesn't seem to have good instincts as a kick returner. 

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but I was happy in this game to see one of our heady safeties dealing with the kicks in that wind rather than McKenzie.

 

 

 

Me too.  I think it was a smart move.  I don’t trust McKenzie or Stevenson, either.  And KO returns were only an issue for half of the game, anyway, with the wind.  So Hyde could catch punts, and kickoffs could be dealt with by anyone able to catch and maintain possession of the the football. 

[Thurman#1]

21 hours ago, Trogdor said:

He has 1 lost fumble this year. You're at a higher risk letting Allen run with it. 

 

 

Whether a fumble is lost or not - that is, who picks it up after it hits the ground - generally comes down to luck, unless it's a guy fumbling it right out of bounds or something. 

 

Fumbles lost isn't the key metric for figuring a guy's risk. It's just plain fumbles. McKenzie this year has returned 17 punts, though he's fielded more than that, and 22 KRs. That's 39 kicks returned and 3 fumbles. That just isn't good.

 

I hope they can figure something out with him, but this is a huge problem. It's close to a 10% rate.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Thurman#1

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

3 hours ago, Bob in STL said:

Dawson Knox hurt us more yesterday than McKenzie ever has. Yet with the game on the line Knox’s number was called and he did not make a play.   Should Knox live in fear of not playing next week?  Of course not. 
 

Players being benched for mistakes is not new or wrong, but public discussions about it are never good.  
 

I am shocked at McDermott’s public comments on not trusting players. It seems out of character.
 

This has been a trying season and there are other puzzling comments by him, players, and coaches.  For the first time in McD era this team’s culture is not flattering.  It shows in their 0-4 record in games decided by one score.  No come from behind wins.  A 3-3 home record.  
 

I said this before.  This team reminds me of the 1989 Bills. A team that regressed after a big year, then emerged and became great. 
 

McD needs to hold the team together, treat this as part of the learning process, and get better in all phases of the game. The Bills are still a work in progress. 
 

Interesting perspective.  I’ve gotta believe ball security and decision making is more than a seen in game problem. 

[Niagara Bill]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

No, he really has not lost faith and trust in the process.

 

What he did was he became angry. Your word, frustration, would also certainly be a fair one. That is about a level four of ten on a scale of response to bad events, with losing faith in the process being around a nine and a half with suicide being a ten.

 

That's his foundation. He certainly has not lost it. 

 

He has become angry. Not blinded ... though where you come up with this is completely unapparent.

 

Jeez the boards go nuts after bad games. And this certainly was an awful game.

 

 

Easy answer to your question. If he was asked 2 months ago what the process contains, he would never have said to publicly ridicule a player, or never to have publicly critique a coach or coordinator.

His faith in the system he created, he broke it, he lost faith, his anger blinded him, he left the system.

Your scale is a little out of wack, IMHO. 😁

[Governor]

5 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

As usual you're far beyond wrong into clueless and buried so deep into confirmation bias and wildly extreme pessimism as to be completely lost.

 

Belichick is as much dealing with everyone's feelings and headspace as any other coach. So that's utter crap. He doesn't avoid that area. He simply deals with it differently. Every coach who deals with human beings deals with headspace and feelings.

 

Being kind doesn't mean that McDermott needs to force himself to spend twelve hours a day asking everyone about their emotions and what their favorite Air Supply song is. Nor does Belichick avoid personal speech with his players. Everyone who's worked for Belichicks says he knows the names of their kids and spouses, that he fairly often asks about them and their families. You can be tough as hell and still have a human side.

 

Autocrats and nice guys deal alike with time limits. McDermott certainly deals with his players more respectfully. Doesn't mean he allows people to waste his time.

 

Plenty of nice guys have a terrific knowledge of x's and o's as well. Belichick is the best, arguably. There is zero evidence that's because he's an #######. Arians is a perfect example that a guy doesn't have to be an autocrat to be a very very successful head coach. Coughlin decided he couldn't keep the team as a martinet and mellowed out and that decision won him two Super Bowls and the ability to stay with one franchise for a period that felt like forever. And there are plenty more like them, like Harbaugh, Tomlin, and frankly McDermott though I'm sure he would agree he has a lot more to prove.

 

And really? You're trying to use the Bills over the last 40 years as evidence on McDermott? McDermott, who's been here for just over 10% of that time? Good lord! You aren't aware that makes zero sense, like none? The Bills certainly are inconsistent this year. Much less so last year. 

 

In fact there's not much evidence of your whole thesis, mostly because it isn't anywhere near black and white. Where does McDermott fall on the scale of martinet to ball of jelly? 76%? Belichick? Everyone's a mix of these qualities, but even without any specific research it's easily observable that plenty of players coaches have done extremely well over the years in the modern era.

 

Fair enough to note that some coaches become great in their second job, Belichick, Carroll and plenty of others included. Of course plenty do terrific in their first job. And plenty are probably terrible in their first job largely because the players on the roster at their first team suck and they luck into a Brady at your second job, as did both Belichick and Arians.

 

 

 

Do you know what the main difference is between Bellichick and most of the league and why he’s the GOAT?

 

No praying needed.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Governor

[ndirish1978]

I'd say he went too far with his cowardly playcalling and poor game management. Going for a FG against the wind and punting the possession before. Challenging a QB sneak that had zero visible camera angles to overturn the call. Inexcusable to not have a TO available to at least attempt a Hail Mary at the end of the game. 

[TheFunPolice]

Sean hasn't forgotten the April Fools' phone calls...

 

He laughed then but he filed it away. 

[Mr. WEO]

5 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Yeah, good question. 

 

McDermott sends messages, even in public, all the time. This is one of the harshest he's ever sent publicly, IMO. But when it comes to NFL-speak, it just isn't much.

 

I mean, McKenzie fumbled that without being touched. There was good reason for anger.

 

He's a coin flip better than a touchback.  Whether he plays or not is not a current concern for this term.  They have other issues.

[US Egg]

McD used the "kick the dog" syndrome regarding McKenzie.

 

Using one low level player, to publicly infer as an integral cause for team woes and avoiding thrashing the hierarchy players who were just as deserving of skewering, but not daring to do so because of their "status".....and losing the locker room.

 

A subtle McD bully stunt, he thinks this will go unnoticed by the players.

Edited December 9, 2021 by I am the egg man

[Scott7975]

14 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Whether a fumble is lost or not - that is, who picks it up after it hits the ground - generally comes down to luck, unless it's a guy fumbling it right out of bounds or something. 

 

Fumbles lost isn't the key metric for figuring a guy's risk. It's just plain fumbles. McKenzie this year has returned 17 punts, though he's fielded more than that, and 22 KRs. That's 39 kicks returned and 3 fumbles. That just isn't good.

 

I hope they can figure something out with him, but this is a huge problem. It's close to a 10% rate.

 

Every stat site I went to has McKenzie at 1 fumble and 1 fumble lost