zow2 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 1 hour ago, Mikie2times said: The only coaches in NFL history with a .600 or better winning % an no Super Bowl, NFL Championship, or conference championship are Marty, Lafleur, and McD. When you move that goal post to .550 the list includes. Mike Smith Don Coryell Mike Zimmer Wade Phillips Jason Garrett Chuck Knox Kevin Stefanski Chuck Pagano He has the best QB out of anybody on either list and by a mile in most instances. Do something to change it. Yeah, when i think about this stuff it bother me. A team like the Steelers have all the trophies and their best two QB have been Bradshaw and Roethlisberger. I'm sorry but Kelly and Josh Allen are better than that duo and we have squat. So obviously it points to coaching and a serious lack of clutch defense when it matters most. 2 1 1 1 1 Quote
PBF81 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 6 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said: Let's also ignore that he handpicked QBs twice and botched it. He's lucky he's been able to get something out of Purdy. Not many coaches get the chance to take 2 shots at finding their guy... You're mixing up your years, dude. 2017 was the Jaguars playoff game. Thanks! But, OK, the points on the Houston game still stand. It was on the opposite end of being a coaching masterpiece. Insofar as that Jags playoff game goes, what, a coaching masterpiece there? That was one of Tyrod's all-time worst games as a starter here in Buffalo. Bottom three easily. That would seem to reinforce the point, not counter it. Right? Either way, someone floats an argument. It fails, they they move the goalposts. That fails. At what point after a wash/rinse/repeat exercise do those doing that finally at least admit that it's a possibility against all emotional fortitude in ignorance of the facts? Think about it. How seriously is anyone supposed to take the argument that McD is no different than Reid when McD in his first seven seasons is 5-6 in the playoffs, with four of those wins over wild-card teams, three featuring backup caliber QBs (Jones, Thompson, and Rudolph) and twice nearly losing otherwise, a fourth with a washed-up geriatric QB playing his last game ever, with our only quality playoff win over a team led by QB who as a rule chokes in the playoffs; ... while Reid in his first seven seasons with that underachieving McNabb as his QB went 7-5 with one trip to the Super Bowl, barely losing to Brady & the Pats, four straight trips to the NFC CG, and a 4-1 record in the Divisional round contrasted with McD's 1-3 record in the Divisional Round? Who's really supposed to consider that a valid argument? That's just plain gibberish and nonsense. People can make all of the excuses that they want to, but there's no positively arguing that they're even remotely comparable. McD's record against the Brady led Pats with Brady at the end of his career is 0-6 by an average score of 10-25 with a max offensive score of 17. Reid nearly beat them in the Super Bowl with Brady in his prime. If not for McNabb's 3 INTs they'd have won even. Quote
TheWeatherMan Posted May 20 Posted May 20 4 hours ago, Breakout Squad said: Most of my friends hate McD. I gently remind them of 17 years of futility that has been replaced by expectations of winning every year 🤷 If any of the drought year HC’s had Josh Allen, they would have had regular season success even with the Pats dynasty in place. Some of those teams had nasty defenses. Quote
nedboy7 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 Uhm... McD made the playoffs with Tyrod Taylor Kelvin Benjamin Deonte Thompson. And Vlad Ducasse. He is no Jauron. But to be fair Jauron never had Ramon Humber. 1 Quote
PBF81 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 9 minutes ago, zow2 said: Yeah, when i think about this stuff it bother me. A team like the Steelers have all the trophies and their best two QB have been Bradshaw and Roethlisberger. I'm sorry but Kelly and Josh Allen are better than that duo and we have squat. So obviously it points to coaching and a serious lack of clutch defense when it matters most. And Baltimore winning with Dilfer. The Raiders with Brad Johnson. The Cowboys repeatedly with Aikman, who was good but hardly great and far from Allen or not as good a passer as Kelly. The Skins with Williams, that brick-footed Rypien, or the midget Theismann, also good but far from great. Foles with the Eagles. Quote
hondo in seattle Posted May 20 Posted May 20 I think McD is a good coach. I don't think he's often "outcoached" either in the regular season or the playoffs. I think he's had bad luck going into the playoffs with injuries to key players. I don't believe the D is as physically talented as some others may think. I think McD deserves a lot of credit for our high defensive ranking in years past. I think his defenses are examples of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. You don't see a lot of mental mistakes. You do see a lot of effort and teamwork. But I think the good-not-great level of individual talent hurts us in the playoffs where we lose one-on-one battles. McD is not a warm, loveable guy like, say, Andy Reid. And he's not by any accounts a true genius with scheme. But I do think he's a solid coach overall who prepares his team well and has built a good culture. But as a defensive-minded head coach, his biggest need is finding a good OC. He's struggled there. Dennison and Dorsey didn't work out. Daboll left for a bigger opportunity though some say he wanted out and would have been happy with a lateral move. This is an age-old problem for the Bills. During the drought, our offensive HCs could never find a good DC, and our defensive HCs could never find a good OC. If Brady works out, the Bills will be dangerous. And that's the one big thing I want from McD: find a great OC. Hopefully, with Brady, he already has. We'll see. 1 1 Quote
Jauronimo Posted May 20 Posted May 20 I don't expect to see much of a difference this year relative to the last 3. We may see growth in the way he handles his young coordinators. Does he let them do their thing or does he take over the D and the play calling when things aren't going well? My biggest concern with McD is that his defense has been completely exposed in our last 3 playoff losses. Without 11 healthy starters and a strong rotation of contributors this defense is barely a speed bump for the Chiefs and Bengals when the games matter. I don't see McD coming out with game plans that are confusing or stifling the league's premier offenses even when they're playing without several starters on their offensive line. Meanwhile the Bengals defense made our offense look like they were playing together for the first time all year. I'm probably wrong, but it looks like McD trots out his base defense and if that isn't working then we are properly screwed. 1 Quote
PBF81 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 9 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: Uhm... McD made the playoffs with Tyrod Taylor Kelvin Benjamin Deonte Thompson. And Vlad Ducasse. He is no Jauron. But to be fair Jauron never had Ramon Humber. He made the playoffs because of Dalton to Boyd. That's pretty obvious, isn't it? I mean when you have zero control over getting in ... He was dismantled in the playoffs by a former coach of ours that everyone knows wasn't any good, and who had Bortles at the helm. Under his guidance Taylor posted one of his worst few games as a Bill in the playoff game. Seems that that would be relevant. Meh, maybe not. LOL We were one of just a few teams in modern NFL history to have made the playoffs with a negative point-differential and easily the worst of those that did. We made the playoffs on a tiebreaker having absolutely nothing to do with head-to-head with two teams that also finished 9-7 but with point differentials of +92 and +83 to our -57. Those are differences of 149 and 140, or about 9 PPG. I believe that we have the distinction of having been the team with the worst point-differential ever to make the playoffs. Of our 9 wins, all but two were over anything but crappy teams with horrible records, essentially the worst teams in the league. The other two were over the 10-6 and 6th seeded Falcons and the 4th seeded 10-6 Chiefs with Alex Smith at QB. Those are all facts, I'm not quite sure how despite "having made the playoffs" they sound any good. Any former coach could have had the same luck, which is what it was, essentially pure luck, and done the same during the drought years. It's not often, never say never, but pretty close to never, that a team makes the playoffs with a point-differential of -57. I'm still trying to figure out how any growth is measured. 4 Quote
Jauronimo Posted May 20 Posted May 20 4 hours ago, PBF81 said: Really? Shanahan's done notably better with Purdy and Garropalo. Lewis did better with Dalton. Joe Gibbs did phenominally with Rypien, Williams, and Theismann, none of which are even in the conversation with Allen. Johnson did incredibly better with Aikman. Harbaugh did notably better with Flacco. There are others. That is simply not true. You're implying that Reid was no better in the playoffs with McNabb than McD's been with Allen, which is ridiculously false. Just look up their playoff records and performances in each of their first 7 seasons. That's such an intellectually lazy defense. Lewis did better? He won zero playoff games in his 16 years behind the bench. Joe Gibbs had great success in an era where QB play was not nearly as important as it is today. I have no idea what world you live in where Aikman was not a franchise QB. He is enshrined in the hall of fame. Flacco was a top third QB. In any given year he was putting up Eli or Cam type numbers. Prime Flacco is a far cry from Tyrod or Cassel. Shanahan is the only coach in the modern NFL who has had continual success without a franchise QB. Granted he ***** the bed when it mattered even with a franchise QB. Run twice and kick a field goal and he would have a super bowl ring. 1 Quote
hondo in seattle Posted May 20 Posted May 20 29 minutes ago, PBF81 said: He made the playoffs because of Dalton to Boyd. That's pretty obvious, isn't it? I mean when you have zero control over getting in ... He was dismantled in the playoffs by a former coach of ours that everyone knows wasn't any good, and who had Bortles at the helm. Under his guidance Taylor posted one of his worst few games as a Bill in the playoff game. Seems that that would be relevant. Meh, maybe not. LOL We were one of just a few teams in modern NFL history to have made the playoffs with a negative point-differential and easily the worst of those that did. We made the playoffs on a tiebreaker having absolutely nothing to do with head-to-head with two teams that also finished 9-7 but with point differentials of +92 and +83 to our -57. Those are differences of 149 and 140, or about 9 PPG. I believe that we have the distinction of having been the team with the worst point-differential ever to make the playoffs. Of our 9 wins, all but two were over anything but crappy teams with horrible records, essentially the worst teams in the league. The other two were over the 10-6 and 6th seeded Falcons and the 4th seeded 10-6 Chiefs with Alex Smith at QB. Those are all facts, I'm not quite sure how despite "having made the playoffs" they sound any good. Any former coach could have had the same luck, which is what it was, essentially pure luck, and done the same during the drought years. It's not often, never say never, but pretty close to never, that a team makes the playoffs with a point-differential of -57. I'm still trying to figure out how any growth is measured. I was surprised when the Bills made the playoffs McD's first year when you consider how untalented that roster was. Luck? I suppose luck was part of it. Luck is certainly a part of football. But I attribute our success to McD's good coaching. He had guys playing hard even when things looked dire. And he had them playing together. They often looked outclassed, talent-wise, but they didn't look unprepared. Of course, we didn't go far in the playoffs. The talent differential was too much. I never expected to win any playoff games; I was just happy that Kyle Williams got to play in one. I evaluate a HC like this: Given the strength and health of the roster, is he winning more or less games than I'd expect. I think McD's first year may have been his best because he got more out of that squad than anyone had a right to expect. Quote
Mikie2times Posted May 20 Posted May 20 (edited) 1 hour ago, zow2 said: Yeah, when i think about this stuff it bother me. A team like the Steelers have all the trophies and their best two QB have been Bradshaw and Roethlisberger. I'm sorry but Kelly and Josh Allen are better than that duo and we have squat. So obviously it points to coaching and a serious lack of clutch defense when it matters most. McD is organized, consistent, respected. He is certainly above average. I just don't think he is A) the X's and O's guy we want B) the strategic thinker we want as far as taking the next step. Skilled offenses take his system apart. Bengals and KC specifically and just because they have skill doesn't mean it's white flag time. KC and the Bengals both have defenses that have performed even better as competition grew in the past. We have no answer for either team on either side. It doesn't get discussed but things like the fake punt. They fumbled, it shifted the narrative to the missed TD pass. But awful, awful call. Being aggressive was not the wrong call. A poorly executed fake point with Damar Hamlin was the wrong call and it could have been a decision that cost us a Super Bowl had the script been different. Do the Bills at the very least get to one AFC Championship game without him? I have to think the answer is yes. Does Allen make us a perennial contender? I have to think the answer is yes. So why do people just cling to this notion that since we sucked for 20+ years we should wait until McD becomes synonymous with guys like Wade Phillips or Marty? Hell, it's already happening. The odds of us going full blow in that direction are so sever vs the odds of the narrative changing. Edited May 20 by Mikie2times 1 Quote
TFBillsfan Posted May 20 Author Posted May 20 1 hour ago, boater said: A McD hate thread guised as an objective analysis. We haven't seen one in a long time. That really wasn’t the intent of this thread, however the thread has turned into that. Being the offseason, I thought it would be good dialogue on where individuals would like to see growth or development from McDermott. I’m interested to see if he truly acts as the HC this year, letting his DC and OC take the reins. IMO he’s been unbalanced with too much attention on the D which has hurt him at times. My other growth area for McDermott is situational awareness in key moments. 1 Quote
Mikie2times Posted May 20 Posted May 20 1 hour ago, nedboy7 said: Uhm... McD made the playoffs with Tyrod Taylor Kelvin Benjamin Deonte Thompson. And Vlad Ducasse. He is no Jauron. But to be fair Jauron never had Ramon Humber. What incredible thing did he do his first year? Dalton doesn't complete that pass and he blends in with the rest of the 20+ years of futility without a second thought. Quote
PBF81 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 23 minutes ago, Jauronimo said: Lewis did better? He won zero playoff games in his 16 years behind the bench. Joe Gibbs had great success in an era where QB play was not nearly as important as it is today. I have no idea what world you live in where Aikman was not a franchise QB. He is enshrined in the hall of fame. Flacco was a top third QB. In any given year he was putting up Eli or Cam type numbers. Prime Flacco is a far cry from Tyrod or Cassel. Shanahan is the only coach in the modern NFL who has had continual success without a franchise QB. Granted he ***** the bed when it mattered even with a franchise QB. Run twice and kick a field goal and he would have a super bowl ring. Well, OK, if you think that Aikman as a passer compares to Allen, not sure what to tell ya. Fair on Lewis, but it was Dalton that we're talking about and he "made the playoffs" often enough, which seems to be the standard here. Quote
GoBills808 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 10 minutes ago, TFBillsfan said: That really wasn’t the intent of this thread, however the thread has turned into that. Being the offseason, I thought it would be good dialogue on where individuals would like to see growth or development from McDermott. I’m interested to see if he truly acts as the HC this year, letting his DC and OC take the reins. IMO he’s been unbalanced with too much attention on the D which has hurt him at times. My other growth area for McDermott is situational awareness in key moments. I think it's tough to quantify a coach's development because the only real metrics are win%, playoff/superbowls/championship games etc...all very results oriented and not necessarily tied to the HC Personally to echo @JauronimoI would like to see a defense that can either sustain its regular season level into the postseason or even play better. Thus far I am very disappointed in a HC w a defensive background finding his defense completely outclassed in the playoffs. 1 Quote
Royale with Cheese Posted May 20 Posted May 20 2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: I think it's tough to quantify a coach's development because the only real metrics are win%, playoff/superbowls/championship games etc...all very results oriented and not necessarily tied to the HC Personally to echo @JauronimoI would like to see a defense that can either sustain its regular season level into the postseason or even play better. Thus far I am very disappointed in a HC w a defensive background finding his defense completely outclassed in the playoffs. Of all the complaints about McDermott, that's most legit one. I do give a pass last year because they were riddled with injuries but they have been bad to down right brutal too many times. Quote
nedboy7 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 17 minutes ago, PBF81 said: Well, OK, if you think that Aikman as a passer compares to Allen, not sure what to tell ya. Fair on Lewis, but it was Dalton that we're talking about and he "made the playoffs" often enough, which seems to be the standard here. Move those goal posts!!! Quote
PBF81 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 (edited) 59 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said: I was surprised when the Bills made the playoffs McD's first year when you consider how untalented that roster was. Luck? I suppose luck was part of it. Luck is certainly a part of football. Luck was definitely a part of it on several planes. First, anytime that you're entirely reliant upon the unlikeliest of plays by a QB that's quite frankly very average on a good day, that alone has a huge luck component. Otherwise, I'm not sure that anyone arguing this understands how unlikely it is for a team that finished -57 in point differential, while losing to almost every good team that they played, to much less post a winning record much less make the playoffs on the merits of non-H2H tiebreakers. I'd easily wager good money that it doesn't happen again in at least a decade. 59 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said: But I attribute our success to McD's good coaching. He had guys playing hard even when things looked dire. And he had them playing together. They often looked outclassed, talent-wise, but they didn't look unprepared. It's not really a matter of playing hard. If that is the case, why did McD get less out of Taylor than Ryan did? Ryan wasn't a good coach here. There's a disconnect(s) in that reasoning somewhere. 59 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said: Of course, we didn't go far in the playoffs. The talent differential was too much. I never expected to win any playoff games; I was just happy that Kyle Williams got to play in one. We didn't go anywhere, but again, the point is that the playoffs was our worst game from an offensive perspective, not only that season, but in how many games before or after that before Allen showed up? Going back before McD, the next closest time we scored a mere 3 points was in 2012. 59 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said: I evaluate a HC like this: Given the strength and health of the roster, is he winning more or less games than I'd expect. I think McD's first year may have been his best because he got more out of that squad than anyone had a right to expect. OK, so given the strength of our roster these days, featuring Allen and the #1 D, how do you evaluate our playoff performances under McD with Allen at QB? That's the topic that we're discussing. The regular season is pointless other than to make the playoffs, whereupon the real goal (should) start. Sure, some here have said that they're fine with losing as long as we have a team in Buffalo, but that's really not germane to the discussion either. Many expected more than 11 wins last season, or more than 11 in '21. This season is going to be very telling. We'll see how it unfolds, but it shouldn't be unexpected if by season's end there are more detractors than supporters, and after 8 seasons, for McD's MO. In the meantime, I guess all that we can do is to discuss it. 24 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: Move those goal posts!!! What are the goalposts? Set the standard as you see and let's go from there. You pick it. ?? Otherwise, you jumped in on an exchange that was about McD v. Reid again. I put forth the data from each's first seven seasons. You ignored it and moved those goalposts. This obviously has nothing to do with that. So again, what are the goalposts? In your world. We'll go from there. Edited May 20 by PBF81 Quote
Augie Posted May 20 Posted May 20 1 hour ago, hondo in seattle said: I think McD is a good coach. I don't think he's often "outcoached" either in the regular season or the playoffs. I think he's had bad luck going into the playoffs with injuries to key players. I don't believe the D is as physically talented as some others may think. I think McD deserves a lot of credit for our high defensive ranking in years past. I think his defenses are examples of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. You don't see a lot of mental mistakes. You do see a lot of effort and teamwork. But I think the good-not-great level of individual talent hurts us in the playoffs where we lose one-on-one battles. McD is not a warm, loveable guy like, say, Andy Reid. And he's not by any accounts a true genius with scheme. But I do think he's a solid coach overall who prepares his team well and has built a good culture. But as a defensive-minded head coach, his biggest need is finding a good OC. He's struggled there. Dennison and Dorsey didn't work out. Daboll left for a bigger opportunity though some say he wanted out and would have been happy with a lateral move. This is an age-old problem for the Bills. During the drought, our offensive HCs could never find a good DC, and our defensive HCs could never find a good OC. If Brady works out, the Bills will be dangerous. And that's the one big thing I want from McD: find a great OC. Hopefully, with Brady, he already has. We'll see. The problem is, if you have a great OC he will quickly get poached and become a HC. A great DC is less likely to get poached for HC. I really like McD in general, but a defensive minded HC will lead to a lot of turnover at OC whether you hit or miss. 2 1 Quote
<bills4life> Posted May 20 Posted May 20 6 hours ago, Gregg said: The good - turned around the franchise along with Beane to end the 17-year playoff drought. Lots of successful winning seasons as 6 playoff appearances in 7 years prove. The bad - Zero Super Bowl championships along with zero Super Bowl appearances. At some point his seat "should" get hot despite the regular season success. I just don't know if Terry will make the change. You forgot to add 1 afc championship game appearance. Which he single handily blew. The seat should have been smoldering hot that very day. 2 1 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.