Who does Terry Pegula turn to for counsel when it comes to evaluating Beane & McDermott?

[Royale with Cheese]

29 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

That also wasn't my assertion.  You're taking the entire thing out of context.  If Reid had Allen playing the way he's played here, and all that Reid could do was lose Wild Card and Divisional Round games with Hunt playing at insane levels, Hill, and Kelce, then yes, absolutely, I'd have said let's move on.  There obviously would have been some kind of disconnect there between the level of talent and coaching.  Particularly given that the Chiefs were in a division full of slop otherwise during those seasons, similar to the Brady/Belichick Pats years.  

 

But taking that tack, you've moved the argument from comparing Allen to Alex Smith, which is as you realize, is absurd.  

 

I'm also guessing that Reid wouldn't be around now had he continued to lose in early rounds of the playoffs once Mahomes got there and had been playing to that level that he has.  For sure he'd be taking heat from around the league at an absolutely minimum, particularly after his performance in Philly.  It'd be naive to think otherwise.  

 

As to that comparison, comparing it to the Taylor or Fitzpatrick years would be a better comparison.  So on that note, do you think that McD would be doing anywhere close to what Reid did with Alex Smith had he coached our team from 2009 - 2017?  

 

 

 

You again, are evading the question.  The question isn't a hypothetical if Allen had Hill, Kelce, Hunt etc....

It's a question if Reid should have been fired for his playoff performances from 2012-2017.  That's it, quit adding because you don't want to answer.

 

I'm not comparing Alex Smith and Josh Allen.  You seem to be under the impression that you only have to have a franchise QB.

I think I heard you say one time that you wanted Sean Payton to replace McDermott.

 

Alex Smith was not only traded for by Andy Reid but extended him a year later.  You don't trade and extend a guy at that position unless you think they can bring home the Lombardi.

 

Do I think McDermott could lose in the playoffs with Alex Smith like Reid did?  I mean, McDermott got to the playoffs with Tyrod Taylor.

Do you think Tyrod Taylor was a better QB than Alex Smith?

32 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

It was the coaches that put us in those ridiculous defensive alignments that caught national media attention.  You're evading here, understandable given your take, but you're evading.  

 

As to people "being happy with making the playoffs," they've stated it themselves, no sense in telling me that.  That's their angle, not mine.  I certainly don't see a lot of people arguing as you just did when the topic is raised by myself.  To the contrary in fact.  Who cares though.  

 

On your last point(s), I think that's fair on the outside.  I've never stated that I'd have fired McD already, my point however has been that he really needs to do something besides getting ousted in the Wild-Card or Divisional round this season.  IMO 8 seasons is more than enough to prove, with a talent like Allen, that you're capable of doing more.  Particularly when the coaching "glitches" he's demonstrated exist.  That's OJT territory, worse than rookie mistakes.  

 

As to them being good at their jobs, I've also never argued that they suck, they are "good," but we need to define "good."  They clearly haven't been good enough, and they've clearly made coaching errors and otherwise haven't coached to the same positive levels that their playoff counterparts have.  My position is simply that he (McD) has reached a ceiling in coaching.  I don't see any evidence that he's going to get any better.  There definitely isn't any positive trend in that direction, if anything the opposite is true.  

 

As to Beane, a simple review of his Drafts will tell you that if he is "good," then that's also relative, but saying "he's good" but then trying to reveal the piece parts from his Drafts, besides Allen five years ago, is a different exercise altogether.  I would suggest however that if McD doesn't end up cutting it, and if as you imply you'd like to see, house is cleaned, that the image and perceptions of them will drop significantly after that, .... as they always do.  

 

 

 

The coaches clearly haven't been good enough?  Players don't get any blame?  All the Bills losses have been 100% on the coaching?

For a game that has thousands upon thousands of moving parts, things that YOU will never understand....you're just going to sit on top of the hill and just say "coaching" is the ONLY reason we haven't won.

 

You are such a scorned fan and you don't like McDermott....this is what all this is.

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

I am NOT evading. I am disagreeing. You don't like it when people don't agree with you so you accuse them of doing something else. You think coaching was the main reason that we lost that Bengals game. I don't. It played a part, sure. But it played about the part coaching plays in most NFL games (about a 3rd). Two thirds is almost always down to the players on the field and the Bills (both in the Miami game and the Bengals game) made way too many basic mistakes. Yes, there was some off coverage that people hated. But that was not close to the main reason we lost the football game. As for a review of Beane's drafts - I point you towards @JGMcD2 - who has done the analysis on this. 

 

And many people will change their perceptions of Bills coaches and GMs after they are let go. Defend them while they are here, attack them once they have moved on. I get that there is a core of fans who are like that. The new guy is always the best guy... but I am not and never have been one of those fans. I'm not a homer. I don't always think the Bills and the people currently on the team or on the sideline or in the box are the right people. I actually watch the games, I watch the all22, I analyse what I see and I form a view. I'm not defending Sean McDermott because he is the Bills Head Coach. I am defending him because I don't think he is at fault for many of the things you think he is at fault for. I was the biggest critic of Dick Jauron and Rex Ryan when they were here. I called Chan Gailey a glorified college OC. Again, I watch the games, I watch them again. I watch the all22. If I think someone is making consistently bad coaching decisions I say it. McDermott screwed the pooch at Kansas City in the 2021 playoffs. But the coaching generally in the playoffs has not been the reason for our defeats. 

 

Alright, allow me to take your post in pieces here.  

 

Quote

I am NOT evading. I am disagreeing. You don't like it when people don't agree with you so you accuse them of doing something else. You think coaching was the main reason that we lost that Bengals game. I don't. It played a part, sure. But it played about the part coaching plays in most NFL games (about a 3rd). Two thirds is almost always down to the players on the field and the Bills (both in the Miami game and the Bengals game) made way too many basic mistakes. Yes, there was some off coverage that people hated. But that was not close to the main reason we lost the football game. 

 

I don't care at all if anyone disagrees, all I ask for is a basis for that disagreement.  

 

To wit, I've never said that the sole reason why we lost the Bengals game was coaching/McD.  You're putting those words in my mouth.  But on the other hand, yes, you disagree, but don't counter, what I said, with anything concrete other than to say that it "wasn't the sole reason," which has nothing to to do with my point, A, and B, is not a pro-coaching/McD argument in response.  

 

My point is that it was a poorly coached game, regardless of what the players did.  He also didn't have the team properly prepared, and now we even know from an equipment (cleats) standpoint, when his counterpart was to add insult to injury for him.  That's all.  Don't overstate what I did say.  

 

Otherwise, as I've offered before, find a well-coached game of his in the playoffs?  You may find one or two as exceptions, but generally speaking there aren't any games in which we could say, Wow, what a wonderfully coached game.  We've gone back-n-forth on the "13 Seconds" thing, which was as I said, worse than a rookie error, but let's look at the rest of the game.  We won because Allen & Davis went off, and for no other reason.  No offensive player otherwise put in anything more than a low-end performance, including money-man Diggs who had 3 catches for 7 yards on 6 targets.  

 

The Defense, our #1 ranked Defense, got balled.  The reason, aka excuse, is that it was the Chiefs' high-powered offense.  But let's look at that.  Our #1 Defense allowed the Chiefs to log their 4th most total yards in regulation all season, including two other playoff games vs. the 17th and 20th ranked defenses.  We allowed their 8th most 1st-Downs in regulation all season as well.  In OT they averaged 8.0 YPP, which is abysmal defensively, DFL type of abysmal, on 8 plays featuring 6 different players, three of which are low-end players, one currently not even on an NFL roster, and with the fourth being Edwards-Helaire, hardly Derrick Henry or Josh Jacobs.  In your mind, and "13 Seconds" aside, was that, or conversely, was that a good coaching effort on the defensive side of the ball?   

 

And what does it say when we need Allen and Davis to go off like that to be in a game?  You cite the failure of the players to execute, but let's be honest here, those plays between Allen & Davis, and at least one in particular, were not coaching, they were the individual play of those two that simply took it to another level.  You excuse McD when the players fail, even though the reasons for the team not performing also had something to do with him otherwise, but are you consistent in saying that Allen/Davis made McD look better than he actually is in that game too?  What's good for the goose ... right?  

 

Otherwise, as to coaching negligence, I would quickly point to the lack of use of our running game, particularly when it's clicking.  The comments in the game-day threads corroborate that perfectly.  But to add some perspective, take away Allen's rushing and we were by far and away DFL in the NFL for rushing carries and very near DFL for rushing yards.  Why?  Because as a tandem, Singletary and Cook averaged 5.0 YPC, which would be good for 3rd in the League behind rushing powerhouse Chicago (5.4) and Baltimore. (5.2)  

 

Did Singletary and Cook decide when they were running the ball?  How many carries they'd get?  

 

Isn't that on coaching?  And before you blame Dorsey, not McD, doesn't McD have some say, isn't he bright enough and a good enough coach, to challenge Dorsey when the run is working great as to why they stopped?  What, how much "football intelligence" does someone need to be able to piece those two dots together.  

 

Quote

As for a review of Beane's drafts - I point you towards @JGMcD2 - who has done the analysis on this. 

 

Would love to see it an offer my perspective.  I'll read it if you link it.  I've found that the Draft analyses here are defensive in nature however, but don't explain why so few or our draft picks become above-average players much less impact players.  Apart from Allen Beane's drafts have produced next to nothing in that regard.  It's one thing to produce "starters," but that is meaningless when those starters aren't getting it done.  I mean think about it, how many draft "starters" do crappy 4-12 teams have?  I'm sure plenty.  And then trading away players like Hodgins and Teller ... that merely adds insult to injury.  

 

This is going to be an interesting season.  We've generally had easy schedules the past three seasons.  This year's is, at least at this point in time, not easy.  Per our prior couple of posts, IMO if McD cannot advance at least to the CCG this season, and win the division, then on top of my thinking that it'll be time for a change, I think that there's going to be a whole lot of media and fan opinions supporting that notion as well.  It's one thing to slide through a greased-up schedule, win a division filled with QB-less teams for the most part, win an occasional Wild-Card game, but it'll be completely another to prove coaching prowess given this season's schedule.  

 

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by PBF81

[PBF81]

49 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

You again, are evading the question.  The question isn't a hypothetical if Allen had Hill, Kelce, Hunt etc....

It's a question if Reid should have been fired for his playoff performances from 2012-2017.  That's it, quit adding because you don't want to answer.

 

I'm not comparing Alex Smith and Josh Allen.  You seem to be under the impression that you only have to have a franchise QB.

I think I heard you say one time that you wanted Sean Payton to replace McDermott.

 

Alex Smith was not only traded for by Andy Reid but extended him a year later.  You don't trade and extend a guy at that position unless you think they can bring home the Lombardi.

 

Do I think McDermott could lose in the playoffs with Alex Smith like Reid did?  I mean, McDermott got to the playoffs with Tyrod Taylor.

Do you think Tyrod Taylor was a better QB than Alex Smith?

 

Actually, you're evading here, not me.  

 

This ridiculous insinuation or implication that Reid with Alex Smith, one of the most marginal QBs in the game, ever, contrasted with Reid/Mahomes or McD/Allen, quite frankly, is absurd.  

 

 

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

I don't know why 2009-2017? But do I think McDermott would have got Alex Smith led Bills teams to the playoffs? Yes. He got a Tyrod freaking Taylor led team with much less talent than the Chiefs team Reid and Smith had to the playoffs. Even the year Reid arrived with the Chiefs they had the #1 pick but at the same time 6 pro bowlers on a team that finished with the worst record in football. 

 

You do realize that we needed the unlikeliest of plays provided by another team to make the playoffs, right? 

 

Did you realize that 7 of our 9 wins that season were against teams that finished with 4, 5, or 6 wins?  
 

And I'd love to hear your defense of McD in that rough playoff game against the Jags, let by Blake Bortles, in a 10-3 loss.   His "Tyrod freaking Taylor led team" posted 17 for 34, for 134 Yards, 0 TDs, 1 INT, and a rating of 44.2.  It was one of his few worst games ever.  Two of his three worst starts were also under McD.  It was also Taylor's worst season in Buffalo.  I'll put it another way, Ryan got more out of him against tougher schedules.  With similar luck in week 17 Ryan's Bills could have made the playoffs too having had the scheduling fortunes that McD had.  

 

I mean if that's what your citing in McD's defense and a justification for your statement, I'm not quite sure what to say.  

 

What's the next argument?   

 

 

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

But the coaching generally in the playoffs has not been the reason for our defeats. 

 

Oh, sorry, I forgot to address this, but it's also not the reason for our success, which is my point.  

 

Look, if I were content with winning an easy QB-less division and getting ousted every Wild-Card or Divisional Round, I'd think similarly.  But I'm not, and there are no positive trends here, which is my primary contention.  

 

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by PBF81

[Royale with Cheese]

26 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Actually, you're evading here, not me.  

 

This ridiculous insinuation or implication that Reid with Alex Smith, one of the most marginal QBs in the game, ever, contrasted with Reid/Mahomes or McD/Allen, quite frankly, is absurd.  

 

 

 

LOL

 

What am I evading?

 

So basically, your thoughts are, unless you have a elite franchise level QB, it's perfectly fine to consistently lose in the playoffs.

You simply won't answer the question and we all know why.

[PBF81]

16 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

LOL

 

What am I evading?

 

So basically, your thoughts are, unless you have a elite franchise level QB, it's perfectly fine to consistently lose in the playoffs.

You simply won't answer the question and we all know why.

 

If you read the contexts of the conversations that I've had with the people that I'm interacting with, you should easily be able to note that the context has always been "with Allen."  

 

It would be disingenuous for me to compare a HC that has a below-average QB with others that have a phenom.  Which, if you've read what I've wrote, is why I compare McD to some of our other coaches that also finished in the 7-9 to 9-7 range, just without McD's luck of 2017, and also with average at best QBs.  

 

Likewise, it's also disingenuous for anyone else to do the same.  

 

Furthermore, if Allen hadn't been here, I'm pretty sure we'd be discussing another HC and GM already.  

 

 

On 5/23/2023 at 10:29 AM, GunnerBill said:

They were. And only one was a debacle - the 13 seconds. 

 

BTW, on the coaching note, you've stated a number of times now that the reason for some of our key losses, most notably in the playoffs, has been because of a lack of performance of the team.  

 

But isn't that the primary responsibility of a coach, to have their team fully prepared and functioning on all cylinders as a team, a coordinated unit.  To then relegate the lack thereof out of the realm of coaching responsibility doesn't seem to be viable.  IOW, if the players aren't prepared or focused, shouldn't that befall the coach.  

 

As well, it's also difficult to explain when one routinely ignores the play of entire units, like our Rushing offense.  

 

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by PBF81

[JGMcD2]

55 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

Would love to see it an offer my perspective.  I'll read it if you link it.  I've found that the Draft analyses here are defensive in nature however, but don't explain why so few or our draft picks become above-average players much less impact players.  Apart from Allen Beane's drafts have produced next to nothing in that regard.  It's one thing to produce "starters," but that is meaningless when those starters aren't getting it done.  I mean think about it, how many draft "starters" do crappy 4-12 teams have?  I'm sure plenty.  And then trading away players like Hodgins and Teller ... that merely adds insult to injury.  

 

This is going to be an interesting season.  We've generally had easy schedules the past three seasons.  This year's is, at least at this point in time, not easy.  Per our prior couple of posts, IMO if McD cannot advance at least to the CCG this season, and win the division, then on top of my thinking that it'll be time for a change, I think that there's going to be a whole lot of media and fan opinions supporting that notion as well.  It's one thing to slide through a greased-up schedule, win a division filled with QB-less teams for the most part, win an occasional Wild-Card game, but it'll be completely another to prove coaching prowess given this season's schedule.  

 

I mean we're not a crappy 4-12 team drafting starters. We're the 2nd winningest team in the NFL since 2018 drafting various starters for our team - what do you think Hodgins was for the NYG who had no WR? He was a waiver claim that an overachieving team claimed towards the back of waivers because their starters were poor. 

 

That was the narrative going into last year as well... and then we played a Top 10 SOS and went 13-3. 

Edited May 25, 2023 by JGMcD2

[Royale with Cheese]

54 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

You do realize that we needed the unlikeliest of plays provided by another team to make the playoffs, right? 

 

Did you realize that 7 of our 9 wins that season were against teams that finished with 4, 5, or 6 wins?  
 

And I'd love to hear your defense of McD in that rough playoff game against the Jags, let by Blake Bortles, in a 10-3 loss.   His "Tyrod freaking Taylor led team" posted 17 for 34, for 134 Yards, 0 TDs, 1 INT, and a rating of 44.2.  It was one of his few worst games ever.  Two of his three worst starts were also under McD.  It was also Taylor's worst season in Buffalo.  I'll put it another way, Ryan got more out of him against tougher schedules.  With similar luck in week 17 Ryan's Bills could have made the playoffs too having had the scheduling fortunes that McD had.  

 

I mean if that's what your citing in McD's defense and a justification for your statement, I'm not quite sure what to say.  

 

Who gives a *****?  The Chiefs beat 8 teams last year with 4,5 or 6 wins.  Every year, all good teams play poor teams...a lot of them.

 

And no, we still needed to win and we did.  There are roughly 130 plays in an NFL game, it doesn't come down to one play.  The Ravens didn't take care of business against a 7-9 at home.

 

And your second bolded....

This is just you again being scored lol.

Edited May 25, 2023 by Royale with Cheese

[Royale with Cheese]

14 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

If you read the contexts of the conversations that I've had with the people that I'm interacting with, you should easily be able to note that the context has always been "with Allen."  

 

It would be disingenuous for me to compare a HC that has a below-average QB with others that have a phenom.  Which, if you've read what I've wrote, is why I compare McD to some of our other coaches that also finished in the 7-9 to 9-7 range, just without McD's luck of 2017, and also with average at best QBs.  

 

Likewise, it's also disingenuous for anyone else to do the same.  

 

Furthermore, if Allen hadn't been here, I'm pretty sure we'd be discussing another HC and GM already.  

 

 

 

BTW, on the coaching note, you've stated a number of times now that the reason for some of our key losses, most notably in the playoffs, has been because of a lack of performance of the team.  

 

But isn't that the primary responsibility of a coach, to have their team fully prepared and functioning on all cylinders as a team, a coordinated unit.  To then relegate the lack thereof out of the realm of coaching responsibility doesn't seem to be viable.  IOW, if the players aren't prepared or focused, shouldn't that befall the coach.  

 

As well, it's also difficult to explain when one routinely ignores the play of entire units, like our Rushing offense.  

 

 

 

Its not disingenuous.  You just don't want to answer the question.  Change your name to evade.

 

Now Alex Smith is a below average QB lol.  

Reid extended him to a 4/$68 million dollar deal with $45 million guaranteed which put him in the top 20 at the time of all NFL players.

Not only that, after his horrific injury, he got a $50 million guaranteed contract!

How much are you going to reach lol?

 

"If you don't agree with me McDermott sucks"

[Royale with Cheese]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

 

This is going to be an interesting season.  We've generally had easy schedules the past three seasons.  

 

This is just incorrect.

 

 

[GunnerBill]

17 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

BTW, on the coaching note, you've stated a number of times now that the reason for some of our key losses, most notably in the playoffs, has been because of a lack of performance of the team.  

 

But isn't that the primary responsibility of a coach, to have their team fully prepared and functioning on all cylinders as a team, a coordinated unit.  To then relegate the lack thereof out of the realm of coaching responsibility doesn't seem to be viable.  IOW, if the players aren't prepared or focused, shouldn't that befall the coach.  

 

As well, it's also difficult to explain when one routinely ignores the play of entire units, like our Rushing offense.  

 

 

 

The Head Coach is ultimately accountable. I don't think I have blamed a number of our playoff losses just on lack of performance. I have blamed the Cincy loss on that. We just sucked on the day. I put 2022 Cincy overwhelmingly on the players. I put KC 2021 overwhelmingly on coaching. In 2020 and 2019 we lost to teams that at that time were better than us. 

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

Would love to see it an offer my perspective.  I'll read it if you link it.  I've found that the Draft analyses here are defensive in nature however, but don't explain why so few or our draft picks become above-average players much less impact players.  Apart from Allen Beane's drafts have produced next to nothing in that regard.  It's one thing to produce "starters," but that is meaningless when those starters aren't getting it done.  I mean think about it, how many draft "starters" do crappy 4-12 teams have?  I'm sure plenty.  And then trading away players like Hodgins and Teller ... that merely adds insult to injury. 

 

I'm not saying this is you, but one of the "tells" that someone is more interested in crafting a narrative than discussing something based upon facts, is when they are sloppy with facts.

 

Hodgins was not traded. He was waived, and claimed by a team that was decimated by WR injuries and gave him a chance to start.  That's a fact.

 

Now, a bit more granularity:

There's this Legend that's grown up around Wyatt Teller that he was traded and instantly became an all pro.  The fact is, he was traded and was not even an instant starter for his new team.  He sat on the bench of his new team for 6 games before playing the end of a game as an injury replacement and starting 9 games.  He then had rather a spotty 3rd season before locking down RG his 4th season (2nd season under a different coach) and Getting Paid for quality play - on a team with a very different blocking scheme and a run-first offensive philosophy.  And we'll see now, how that OL does for Watson, who has a very different style of QB play.  So yes, in hindsight, trading him looks like a mistake, but it took at least two season with his new team to look that way.

 

In hindsight, would it have been better to have kept Teller than Spencer Long?  Than Ike Boettger or Bates?  Probably, and once we learned Feliciano was actually a capable NFL center, I'm sure Beane would agree.  But the Bills went into Allen's 2nd year determined to upgrade on OL, and in particular from Russell Bodine at C.  Their big FA add, Mitch Morse, went into the season with a concussion that knocked him out of pre-season.  Teller was not going to start over Feliciano (Bobby Johnson's "guy") or Quinton Spain, so as backups, it only made sense to keep the guy (Long) who had actually started 13 games at C.

 

The point is, fans fixate on a couple of GM decisions that look bad in hindsight.  But it's only in hindsight.  When you look at them in the context of the entire roster at the time they were made, they make logical sense.  (the same is true when you look at the injuries and the roster composition at the point where Beane waived Hodgins - he had a roster crunch at DB with Tre White needing to be activated but unable to play, other DBs were injured, it made sense to waive Hodgins over the WR who was also a ST ace.

 

This is not to give Beane a "hall pass", there are certainly puzzling player personnel decisions and some draft day whiffs that are worthy of critique, but it's strange that fans fixate on those 2. 

 

One also must ask - how many "above average players" or "impact players" do you think other GMs drafts regularly produce, especially when they're drafting late?  And for that matter, how do you define "above average players"

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

The Head Coach is ultimately accountable. I don't think I have blamed a number of our playoff losses just on lack of performance. I have blamed the Cincy loss on that. We just sucked on the day. I put 2022 Cincy overwhelmingly on the players. I put KC 2021 overwhelmingly on coaching. In 2020 and 2019 we lost to teams that at that time were better than us. 

 

Thanks for that.  

 

You can add the 2021 loss to KC and put it on McD.  Again, 36 points in regulation as I pointed out, and a massive underperformance by our D cannot be ignored.  

 

In 2019, perhaps, but Houston had the 19th ranked D, we had the 2nd ranked D.  With more given is more expected.  The only standout player on that O, unless you count Watson who posted a good but far from great season, was Hopkins.  

 

Either way, allowing 19 second half points while leading 13-0 at the half, certainly indicates that coaching had a big role, on both sides, in a 22-19 OT outcome.  So I disagree there that Houston was significantly better.  That's the kind of game that if you coach well you win.  It's not even as if Houston had a top-10 offense, they were ranked 14th.  

 

But I'll tell you what, go through game-by-game in the playoffs and say what your take on coaching was given our team and its rankings and the opponents likewise.  

 

I've done that and I'm not seeing anything, and for sure no pattern towards improvement, to the contrary in fact, that McD has improved in that way.  

 

That's the crux of our disagreement on this.  If McD had been improving all along I'd be the first one calling for patience.  It's not there however.  

 

I agree with your statement earlier, as I've said, that's all I'm suggesting, that if things don't improve this season, and you gave it another season or two, then we need to consider why it hasn't improved.  

 

I'm not even sure I'd say that Cincy was better than us last season, or even KC the year prior in '21 either.  Our D was notably better and IMO their offense wasn't that much better than ours as our D was better than their D, if even their 4th ranked offense were better than our 3rd ranked offense that season.  

 

But in comparing in that way, we've barely beaten some teams in the playoffs that we were notably better than.  At some point coaching has to take the fall.  The team's lack of preparedness or readiness and poor play on the field, for whatever reasons, factors into that.  We haven't even really discussed the losses that much.  

 

Anyway, if you want, let's go thru game by game for the 9 playoff games we've been in and try to figure out whether coaching, or lack thereof, played a role.  Let me know.  

 

 

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, Beck Water said:

I'm not saying this is you, but one of the "tells" that someone is more interested in crafting a narrative than discussing something based upon facts, is when they are sloppy with facts.

 

Hodgins was not traded. He was waived, and claimed by a team that was decimated by WR injuries and gave him a chance to start.  That's a fact.

 

Now, a bit more granularity:

There's this Legend that's grown up around Wyatt Teller that he was traded and instantly became an all pro.  The fact is, he was traded and was not even an instant starter for his new team.  He sat on the bench of his new team for 6 games before playing the end of a game as an injury replacement and starting 9 games.  He then had rather a spotty 3rd season before locking down RG his 4th season (2nd season under a different coach) and Getting Paid for quality play - on a team with a very different blocking scheme and a run-first offensive philosophy.  And we'll see now, how that OL does for Watson, who has a very different style of QB play.  So yes, in hindsight, trading him looks like a mistake, but it took at least two season with his new team to look that way.

 

In hindsight, would it have been better to have kept Teller than Spencer Long?  Than Ike Boettger or Bates?  Probably, and once we learned Feliciano was actually a capable NFL center, I'm sure Beane would agree.  But the Bills went into Allen's 2nd year determined to upgrade on OL, and in particular from Russell Bodine at C.  Their big FA add, Mitch Morse, went into the season with a concussion that knocked him out of pre-season.  Teller was not going to start over Feliciano (Bobby Johnson's "guy") or Quinton Spain, so as backups, it only made sense to keep the guy (Long) who had actually started 13 games at C.

 

The point is, fans fixate on a couple of GM decisions that look bad in hindsight.  But it's only in hindsight.  When you look at them in the context of the entire roster at the time they were made, they make logical sense.  (the same is true when you look at the injuries and the roster composition at the point where Beane waived Hodgins - he had a roster crunch at DB with Tre White needing to be activated but unable to play, other DBs were injured, it made sense to waive Hodgins over the WR who was also a ST ace.

 

This is not to give Beane a "hall pass", there are certainly puzzling player personnel decisions and some draft day whiffs that are worthy of critique, but it's strange that fans fixate on those 2. 

 

One also must ask - how many "above average players" or "impact players" do you think other GMs drafts regularly produce, especially when they're drafting late?  And for that matter, how do you define "above average players"

 

OK, but in fairness my point wasn't how Hodgkins or Teller left, it was sloppy, but also irrelevant.  IMO a good coach would have seen that talent and developed it, particularly amidst a morass of talent otherwise.  

 

The fact that Hodgkins was waived and not traded adds, not subtracts, to what my point was.  I will thank you for pointing that out.  

 

As to Teller, the entire scenario would make much more sense if we hadn't had a revolving door of OL-men coming and going as if it were a brothel on a Saturday night at Mardi Gras.  

 

Ducasse, Miller, Bodine, Mills, Groy, Sirles, Boettger, Spain, Feliciano, Long, Nsecke, Winters, Williams, Bates, Saffold, Hart, Murray, Van Rotten, Quessenberry to name most of 'em.  A bunch of those were brought in to start, and most did start some games, primarily because we didn't have anyone better.  Either way, it's far from anything even beginning to approach impressive.  We can't even find a few players that it's impressive for.  

 

And if Teller didn't fit the system, then why'd we draft him?  The system(s) they played in are always known prior to drafting them.  But shhhh, we're not allowed to talk about that or how it's related to Beane.  LOL  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, PBF81 said:

Anyway, if you want, let's go thru game by game for the 9 playoff games we've been in and try to figure out whether coaching, or lack thereof, played a role.  Let me know.  

 

 

To do that properly you need to do A LOT more than go through rankings. That is my point. You need to sit with the game film and go through it and break it down properly. I have done that and that is how I have come to my conclusion. Do I have time to re-do it now for the sake of trying to win a message board argument? No. 

 

I have given you my general sense.

 

In 2019 - the Bills got beaten by a Houston team that really laid an egg in the first half but in the second half JJ Watt had a critical 3rd down sack to force a FG deep in HOU territory; Whitney Merciless had the strip sack of Allen in the 4th Quarter; DeAndre Hopkins had 6 catches for 90 yards and Deshaun Watson had an exceptional sack eluding play to set up their winning field goal. Houston's best 4 players showed up in the big moments. At that point we had Josh who had not yet developed into the elite QB he is, and Tre White who ultimately lost the 1v1 battle with Hopkins. It was before we had Stef Diggs. The better team won the game and their high end players were the difference makers.

 

In 2020 - the Bills, Colts game was a closer game than some expected, sure, and I don't think it was a great coaching job by Daboll (and this isn't me saying see Daboll sucks because he has left, I was and remain a Daboll fan... just wasn't his best day) the offensive gameplan was a bit meh, but it certainly wasn't a disaster. Conversely they had a really good plan on defense which was take Jonathan Taylor away (he was held to fewer that 4 yards per carry) and force the geriatric QB to beat you in January weather in Buffalo. He couldn't. Then they had an excellent coaching plan against the Ravens and held them in check and then KC were just better than us. In every facet they dominated that football game. They thrashed us in both trenches. As I say constantly when you get whipped in the trenches there are not many plays on your play sheet that are going to work.

 

In 2021 - We played KC extremely well, coaching blew it (and I agree by the way it wasn't "just" 13 seconds. I thought the Bills had a great plan and called a great game until the last 2 minutes. I know KC had yards and first downs but the Bills plan against KC was bend and not break and it had worked in the regular season and was working in the playoff game. Kansas City had 26 points with 1:54 to go. How the Bills handled the game from there on in was really poor on the part of coaching). 

 

In 2022 - The players sucked. They made countless mistakes against a Miami team that couldn't move the ball at all on offense and kept what was a complete mismatch close. Then they were flat as a pancake against Cincinnati, their most reliable DB blew two coverages that led to touchdowns, Josh looked and played like a zombie, they couldn't move the ball on offense. It was just a disaster. Could they have mixed up coverages more sooner in the game? Sure they could. Is there any reason to think that would have changed the result based on what happened when they did? Not really. 

[Gugny]

53 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

To do that properly you need to do A LOT more than go through rankings. That is my point. You need to sit with the game film and go through it and break it down properly. I have done that and that is how I have come to my conclusion. Do I have time to re-do it now for the sake of trying to win a message board argument? No. 

 

I have given you my general sense.

 

In 2019 - the Bills got beaten by a Houston team that really laid an egg in the first half but in the second half JJ Watt had a critical 3rd down sack to force a FG deep in HOU territory; Whitney Merciless had the strip sack of Allen in the 4th Quarter; DeAndre Hopkins had 6 catches for 90 yards and Deshaun Watson had an exceptional sack eluding play to set up their winning field goal. Houston's best 4 players showed up in the big moments. At that point we had Josh who had not yet developed into the elite QB he is, and Tre White who ultimately lost the 1v1 battle with Hopkins. It was before we had Stef Diggs. The better team won the game and their high end players were the difference makers.

 

In 2020 - the Bills, Colts game was a closer game than some expected, sure, and I don't think it was a great coaching job by Daboll (and this isn't me saying see Daboll sucks because he has left, I was and remain a Daboll fan... just wasn't his best day) the offensive gameplan was a bit meh, but it certainly wasn't a disaster. Conversely they had a really good plan on defense which was take Jonathan Taylor away (he was held to fewer that 4 yards per carry) and force the geriatric QB to beat you in January weather in Buffalo. He couldn't. Then they had an excellent coaching plan against the Ravens and held them in check and then KC were just better than us. In every facet they dominated that football game. They thrashed us in both trenches. As I say constantly when you get whipped in the trenches there are not many plays on your play sheet that are going to work.

 

In 2021 - We played KC extremely well, coaching blew it (and I agree by the way it wasn't "just" 13 seconds. I thought the Bills had a great plan and called a great game until the last 2 minutes. I know KC had yards and first downs but the Bills plan against KC was bend and not break and it had worked in the regular season and was working in the playoff game. Kansas City had 26 points with 1:54 to go. How the Bills handled the game from there on in was really poor on the part of coaching). 

 

In 2022 - The players sucked. They made countless mistakes against a Miami team that couldn't move the ball at all on offense and kept what was a complete mismatch close. Then they were flat as a pancake against Cincinnati, their most reliable DB blew two coverages that led to touchdowns, Josh looked and played like a zombie, they couldn't move the ball on offense. It was just a disaster. Could they have mixed up coverages more sooner in the game? Sure they could. Is there any reason to think that would have changed the result based on what happened when they did? Not really. 

I will counter that 2019 was coaching and personnel mismanagement. 
 

Duke Williams getting 10 targets and Frank Gore getting 8 carries (including multiple 3rd and shorts for no gain) is pure crap coaching. 
 

That is a game that any decent coaching staff wins that day. 
 

2022 - If a coaching staff can’t get their team mentally prepared for a playoff game, that is a failure. 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Gugny said:

I will counter that 2019 was coaching and personnel mismanagement. 
 

Duke Williams getting 10 targets and Frank Gore getting 8 carries (including multiple 3rd and shorts for no gain) is pure crap coaching. 
 

That is a game that any decent coaching staff wins that day. 
 

2022 - If a coaching staff can’t get their team mentally prepared for a playoff game, that is a failure. 

 

Duke playing, I'll give you, I didn't like that. But at the same time it didn't matter which of our bad receivers we chucked out there that day. The top end talent Houston had outranked ours and those players made the plays that turned the football game. 

 

2022 - sure. But the team played their worst game of the year. What do you suppose coaching had said to them or not said to them to result in that? I have coached, albeit in a different sport, and got paid for it. There are times when your guys just come out flat for whatever reason. The Bills players said it was mental exhaustion who knows but they sucked in that game. Our best player sucked. I don't know what you do about that as a coach. Sometimes it happens. You hate that it happens in a big spot but that's life. Athletes are humans not robots.

[Gugny]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Duke playing, I'll give you, I didn't like that. But at the same time it didn't matter which of our bad receivers we chucked out there that day. The top end talent Houston had outranked ours and those players made the plays that turned the football game. 

 

2022 - sure. But the team played their worst game of the year. What do you suppose coaching had said to them or not said to them to result in that? I have coached, albeit in a different sport, and got paid for it. There are times when your guys just come out flat for whatever reason. The Bills players said it was mental exhaustion who knows but they sucked in that game. Our best player sucked. I don't know what you do about that as a coach. Sometimes it happens. You hate that it happens in a big spot but that's life. Athletes are humans not robots.

 

Athletes are humans who are paid quite handsomely to entertain.

 

An entire team overtly quitting in an elimination game is totally inexcusable.  There are leaders put in place to a) keep that from happening and b) address it when/if it does happen ... and that begins with the Head Coach.

 

He gave them a mulligan because they were "mentally exhausted."  

 

That is pure crap.  And it's horrible leadership.

 

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Athletes are humans who are paid quite handsomely to entertain.

 

An entire team overtly quitting in an elimination game is totally inexcusable.  There are leaders put in place to a) keep that from happening and b) address it when/if it does happen ... and that begins with the Head Coach.

 

He gave them a mulligan because they were "mentally exhausted."  

 

That is pure crap.  And it's horrible leadership.

 

 

I don't know that he gave them a mulligan. But they are humans and they just sucked that day. It happens. It isn't always controllable. 

[corta765]

He turns to the Fellowship of the Ring who arrive on foot from Middle Earth. Quite a hike, great endurance, but big eaters after that walk.