Is it time to move on from McDermott?

[Jrb1979]

1 minute ago, boater said:

 

That "as much a chance" is an unfounded leap of faith not supported by history. The Bills and other teams new coaches, more often than not, fail to move the needle.

History isn't on the Bills side in terms of coaches staying. Only 2 coaches since the 70s have won a Super Bowl after 5 seasons with a team. 

[Mikie2times]

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

For damn good reason. 

 

Not really when you look at the AFC east performance around us, who is going to dethrone us? 

 

It's not insulting to Sean to say we have a considerable QB advantage. Which does REALLY mean something. Teams who get top 10 to top 5 QB play have winning % AVERAGES north of 70% for a decade+. Forget about MVP level play or MVP level play vs the AFC east scrubs. 

 

Most the coaches in this league are pretty close. A few are much worse and a few are much better. Sean, like most, is in neither in the good or bad. Somewhere in the in-between. He does a great job with consistency, focusing on winning turnover battle, and leadership. Not so great job with schematics, adaptation to new ideas, or change. His football philosophies are becoming the norm vs the cutting edge and the roster is just not very talented on his side of the ball. Which you can also blame Beane for, but Sean has to take some blame as well. 

 

At the end of the day we would have several AFC east crowns and likely a conference championship appearance with several of our drought era coaches. We wouldn't have been as consistent. Oh well as far as I'm concerned. 

Edited February 14 by Mikie2times

[Rochesterfan]

38 minutes ago, Gregg said:

 

Beane deserves his share of the blame as well. He has missed on his picks to much in the early rounds of the draft. The Bills have a good roster but not a great one. We have no "game changers" on defense. Von was supposed to be that guy but the injury and now age have prevented that.

Everyone complains that McD failure in the playoffs is based upon the defense and then you argue that the bills only have a good roster not a great roster and no “game changers” on defense.

 

That means that McD must be coaching his butt off to get the second best win % in all of sports over the last 5 years and a top offense and top end defense with only a good roster and no “game changers”.

 

The fact that year after year the Bills have few to no Pro-Bowl players or all pros and yet McD dominates the division and wins a minimum of 1 playoff game with multiple trips to championship round and the last 2 years has the team in a 3 point game with the ball and a shot to win - tells me what I need to know.  
 

 

 

36 minutes ago, Jrb1979 said:

 

There is definitely a chance a new coach sets them back. It's also just as much of a chance a new coach pushes them over the hump. 

 

This is completely false.  Most coaches that take over teams become failures.  It is exceedingly rare for a coach to take over a team and suddenly take them over the top.  Especially as they tend to change out coaching staffs and styles - so you begin to see a lot of turnover and people out of position.

 

it is not unheard of, but the new coach pushing them over the top is a very limited sample size and the failure coaches are numerous- so actually getting better is probably closer to 5-10% chance with a 90-95% chance of the team getting worse.

 

That should not stop the change, but that mixed with the fact that the team and Allen love coach McD and the team is successful and has done more with a weaker talent base should also be part of the equation.

 

 

[Jrb1979]

8 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

Everyone complains that McD failure in the playoffs is based upon the defense and then you argue that the bills only have a good roster not a great roster and no “game changers” on defense.

 

That means that McD must be coaching his butt off to get the second best win % in all of sports over the last 5 years and a top offense and top end defense with only a good roster and no “game changers”.

 

The fact that year after year the Bills have few to no Pro-Bowl players or all pros and yet McD dominates the division and wins a minimum of 1 playoff game with multiple trips to championship round and the last 2 years has the team in a 3 point game with the ball and a shot to win - tells me what I need to know.  
 

 

 

 

This is completely false.  Most coaches that take over teams become failures.  It is exceedingly rare for a coach to take over a team and suddenly take them over the top.  Especially as they tend to change out coaching staffs and styles - so you begin to see a lot of turnover and people out of position.

 

it is not unheard of, but the new coach pushing them over the top is a very limited sample size and the failure coaches are numerous- so actually getting better is probably closer to 5-10% chance with a 90-95% chance of the team getting worse.

 

That should not stop the change, but that mixed with the fact that the team and Allen love coach McD and the team is successful and has done more with a weaker talent base should also be part of the equation.

 

 

While it's a success and I will agree that there is a high probability they get worse with a coaching change. They also have history against them as only 4% of coaches since the 70s have won a Super Bowl after 5 seasons with their team. 

[Mikie2times]

13 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

it is not unheard of, but the new coach pushing them over the top is a very limited sample size and the failure coaches are numerous- so actually getting better is probably closer to 5-10% chance with a 90-95% chance of the team getting worse.

 

This is just an uneducated comment

[DrDawkinstein]

33 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

This is completely false.  Most coaches that take over teams become failures.  It is exceedingly rare for a coach to take over a team and suddenly take them over the top.  Especially as they tend to change out coaching staffs and styles - so you begin to see a lot of turnover and people out of position.

 

it is not unheard of, but the new coach pushing them over the top is a very limited sample size and the failure coaches are numerous- so actually getting better is probably closer to 5-10% chance with a 90-95% chance of the team getting worse.

 

That should not stop the change, but that mixed with the fact that the team and Allen love coach McD and the team is successful and has done more with a weaker talent base should also be part of the equation.

 

 

 

You are being too general. "Most coaches" that take over teams are taking over bad teams as there was a reason the coach was fired.

 

Coaches that take over winning/playoff teams have a much better record.

 

John Fox to Gary Kubiak (wins a SB)

Tony Dungy to John Gruden (wins a SB)

Cowher retired at 8-8, Tomlin goes 10-6 and then wins a SB his 2nd year

Pederson to Siriani in Philly (2 SB appearances, 1 win)

 

Those are just off the top of my head. I'm sure there are others.

 

It is NOT rare for a new coach to take over a winning team and have success.

As a matter of fact, it is more rare that a new coach takes over a winning team and does worse.

 

 

 

Edited February 14 by DrDawkinstein

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

The AFC East stinks and will continue to stink. We have a Josh. We will be in the playoffs for the next 3-5 years just by showing up.

 

What type of setback are you worried about?

 

Man, the sense of entitlement here. Don't let karma hear you. "Just show up."

1 hour ago, Jrb1979 said:

 

There is definitely a chance a new coach sets them back. It's also just as much of a chance a new coach pushes them over the hump. 

 

This is what I'm talking about. Magical thinking. 50/50 odds. More like 2/98 odds 

[PromoTheRobot]

40 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:

Not really when you look at the AFC east performance around us, who is going to dethrone us? 

 

It's not insulting to Sean to say we have a considerable QB advantage. Which does REALLY mean something. Teams who get top 10 to top 5 QB play have winning % AVERAGES north of 70% for a decade+. Forget about MVP level play or MVP level play vs the AFC east scrubs. 

 

Most the coaches in this league are pretty close. A few are much worse and a few are much better. Sean, like most, is in neither in the good or bad. Somewhere in the in-between. He does a great job with consistency, focusing on winning turnover battle, and leadership. Not so great job with schematics, adaptation to new ideas, or change. His football philosophies are becoming the norm vs the cutting edge and the roster is just not very talented on his side of the ball. Which you can also blame Beane for, but Sean has to take some blame as well. 

 

At the end of the day we would have several AFC east crowns and likely a conference championship appearance with several of our drought era coaches. We wouldn't have been as consistent. Oh well as far as I'm concerned. 

 

Miami is not far behind us and the Pats could turn things around quickly. I'm not worried about the Jets. Again, we delude ourselves with our own narratives.

[Mikie2times]

3 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Miami is not far behind us and the Pats could turn things around quickly. I'm not worried about the Jets. Again, we delude ourselves with our own narratives.

I mean, I have data on how teams perform with an elite QB. Nothing we have done here is outside of what that data suggests we would do. You can worry we might have a year like Cincinnati had, but they also have been further than us. So not that worried. 

Edited February 14 by Mikie2times

[Jrb1979]

34 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Man, the sense of entitlement here. Don't let karma hear you. "Just show up."

 

This is what I'm talking about. Magical thinking. 50/50 odds. More like 2/98 odds 

Again you dismiss the 4% odds of McDermott winning a Super Bowl after 5 seasons. 

[Doc Brown]

3 hours ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

I think what we're seeing in this thread is most people don't ever want to move on from McDermott because it's possible to do worse. 

Have you seen the Sabres?

[TheFunPolice]

McDermott gets Allen's entire career. And he's certainly good enough to win a SB. Plenty of "meh" head coaches have gotten one because of either an all time great QB or a great team performance in that game. Just have to get there. 

 

Every year that goes by it'll be "golly, he's won so many games here... the drought... the Sabres "

 

And if (God forbid) injuries lead to a bad record? Well, come on, the guy deserves a mulligan! 

 

Thus, he gets Allen's entire career here. It just is what it is. 

 

I just hope he changes his defensive philosophy because it doesn't work against good QBs. I don't think that's crazy, because he has shown an ability to adapt. 

Edited February 14 by TheFunPolice

[Augie]

2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

So it takes balls to screw up a good thing?

 

People are convincing themselves that McDermott is all that's keeping us from winning it all, and that anyone we hire next will finish the job because we are so close, and there's no chance that a new head coach will set us back.  

 

 

 

I’m quoting this…..because I can. 

[Jrb1979]

1 minute ago, Augie said:

 

I’m quoting this…..because I can. 

Because I can there is no guarantee that McDermott ever wins a Super Bowl. In fact the numbers are against him. 

[Augie]

1 minute ago, Jrb1979 said:

Because I can there is no guarantee that McDermott ever wins a Super Bowl. In fact the numbers are against him. 

 

What kind of numbers are you making up now. I can tell you that your numbers will not decide a single game next year. 

 

There is no point in this. There are a whole lot of people here I would NEVER go into business with. They seem too emotionally attached to see things clearly. 

 

This has gotten old. 

[Jrb1979]

3 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

What kind of numbers are you making up now. I can tell you that your numbers will not decide a single game next year. 

 

There is no point in this. There are a whole lot of people here I would NEVER go into business with. They seem too emotionally attached to see things clearly. 

 

This has gotten old. 

Dunne noted that McDermott is entering his 9th year and only three coaches ever - Tom Landry, Hank Stram, Bill Cowher - have only won Super Bowls that deep into their tenure with an organization. "Even Andy Reid had to leave Philly and draft Mahomes before he got his first ring." 

 

This quote is what I'm talking about. It's not made up numbers. That list is going back to the 70s. 

 

I do see things clearly and I do understand the other side of it. The clear belief that McDermott gives this team a chance to win the Super Bowl every season. You fire him there is no guarantee the next guy will continue that. 

 

Edited February 14 by Jrb1979

[Nihilarian]

1 hour ago, Jrb1979 said:

History isn't on the Bills side in terms of coaches staying. Only 2 coaches since the 70s have won a Super Bowl after 5 seasons with a team. 

2001-(Miami 11-5)--(NYJ 10-6)--(Pittsburgh 13-3)--(Baltimore 10-6)--(Raiders 10-6) Patriots win SB 

 

2003-(Miami 10-6)--(Baltimore 10-6)--(Colts 12-4)--(Titans 12-4)--(12-4)--(Chiefs 13-3)--(Denver 10-6) Patriots win SB 14-2

 

2004-(Pittsburgh 15-1)--(Colts 12-4)--(San Diego 12 -4)--(Denver 10-6) Patriots win SB 14-2

 

2007-(Pittsburgh 10-6)--(Cleveland 10-6)--(Colts 13-3)--(Jacksonville 11-5)--(Titans 10-6)--(San Diego 11-5) Patriots lose SB to NY Giants

 

2011-(Baltimore 12-4)--(Pittsburgh 12-4)--(Bengals9-7)--(Houston 10-6)--(Denver 8-8) Patriots lose SB to NY Giants

 

2014-(Pittsburgh 11-5)--(Bengals 10-5-1)--(Baltimore 10-6)--(Colts 11-5)--(Denver 12-4) Patriots win SB

 

2016-(Miami 10-6)--(Pittsburgh 11-5)-(Houston 9-7)--(Chiefs 12-4)--(Raiders 12-4) Patriots win SB

 

2017-(Buffalo 9-7)--(Pittsburgh 13-3)--(Jacksonville 10-6)--(Titans 9-7)--(Chiefs 10-6) Patriots lose SB

 

2018-(Baltimore 10-6)--(Houston 11-5)--(Colts 10-6)--(Chiefs 12-4)--(San Diego 12-4) Patriots won SB

 

 

Miami-NYJ-Indy- Raiders-Chiefs-Denver-Jacksonville-Cincy-Houston. The KC Chiefs were the only team that fired their HC and went to an SB. The Patriots managed to keep a lot of teams out of the SB...as have the KC Chiefs.

 

Patience grasshopper.

 

Now Pittsburgh & Baltimore kept their same HCs and were back in the playoffs repeatedly... as have the Buffalo Bills.

 

Think about it...discuss! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jrb1979]

1 minute ago, Nihilarian said:

2001-(Miami 11-5)--(NYJ 10-6)--(Pittsburgh 13-3)--(Baltimore 10-6)--(Raiders 10-6) Patriots win SB 

 

2003-(Miami 10-6)--(Baltimore 10-6)--(Colts 12-4)--(Titans 12-4)--(12-4)--(Chiefs 13-3)--(Denver 10-6) Patriots win SB 14-2

 

2004-(Pittsburgh 15-1)--(Colts 12-4)--(San Diego 12 -4)--(Denver 10-6) Patriots win SB 14-2

 

2007-(Pittsburgh 10-6)--(Cleveland 10-6)--(Colts 13-3)--(Jacksonville 11-5)--(Titans 10-6)--(San Diego 11-5) Patriots lose SB to NY Giants

 

2011-(Baltimore 12-4)--(Pittsburgh 12-4)--(Bengals9-7)--(Houston 10-6)--(Denver 8-8) Patriots lose SB to NY Giants

 

2014-(Pittsburgh 11-5)--(Bengals 10-5-1)--(Baltimore 10-6)--(Colts 11-5)--(Denver 12-4) Patriots win SB

 

2016-(Miami 10-6)--(Pittsburgh 11-5)-(Houston 9-7)--(Chiefs 12-4)--(Raiders 12-4) Patriots win SB

 

2017-(Buffalo 9-7)--(Pittsburgh 13-3)--(Jacksonville 10-6)--(Titans 9-7)--(Chiefs 10-6) Patriots lose SB

 

2018-(Baltimore 10-6)--(Houston 11-5)--(Colts 10-6)--(Chiefs 12-4)--(San Diego 12-4) Patriots won SB

 

 

Miami-NYJ-Indy- Raiders-Chiefs-Denver-Jacksonville-Cincy-Houston. The KC Chiefs were the only team that fired their HC and went to an SB. The Patriots managed to keep a lot of teams out of the SB...as have the KC Chiefs.

 

Patience grasshopper.

 

Now Pittsburgh & Baltimore kept their same HCs and were back in the playoffs repeatedly... as have the Buffalo Bills.

 

Think about it...discuss! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are those 2 teams why going back to the 70s why only 3 coaches have won a Super Bowl after 5 seasons with their team? 

[Straight Hucklebuck]

37 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Have you seen the Sabres?

I have definitely seen the Sabres. 

 

Might want to look harder than down the hallway for a GM. 

 

Hey Kevyn - you've been here for awhile and ran Harbor Center - do you want to be GM?

 

Like Ralph Wilson and Russ Brandon scanning a "list of names" and deciding on two in-house finalists for Bills GM in 2010 - Buddy Nix and John Guy. 

16 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

What kind of numbers are you making up now. I can tell you that your numbers will not decide a single game next year. 

 

There is no point in this. There are a whole lot of people here I would NEVER go into business with. They seem too emotionally attached to see things clearly. 

 

This has gotten old. 

Then sign him to a lifetime contract then. 

 

As long as Allen is the QB, its McDermott and Beane. 

 

They get Allen's entire career whether or not they appear in or win a Super Bowl. 

[Augie]

4 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Then sign him to a lifetime contract then. 

 

As long as Allen is the QB, its McDermott and Beane. 

 

They get Allen's entire career whether or not they appear in or win a Super Bowl. 

 

The bold is totally non-responsive to anything I have posted. Where did that come from? What are you talking about?

 

I like making decisions based upon the most current information available. If the situation changes my opinion may as well.