Jump to content

Bobby Beathard


Recommended Posts

When Bobby Beathard was GM of the Redskins, true, he had a hell of a coach in Joe Gibbs. But he also had a philosophy, which he stuck to, that the players he brings in have to have smarts and discipline. It helped get him three Super Bowl rings.

 

Than there's the Bills. Year after year of one dumb penalty after another (Clements today, for instance. Momentum, or any semblence of it, continuallly lost, game after game.

 

Of course, Beathard also was a great judge of talent, which I always thought Donahoe had when he was the Steelers GM. Remember, Pittsburgh, continually lost more quality free agents than other team, yet always managed to draft well as they continued to win. So was it magic or luck?

 

I've totally turned on TD, for four primary reasons. Number one: Greg Williams. Number two: the starting quarterbacks he has brought in have, thus far, proven to be disasters, at significant cost. Number three: everyone knows that the OL needs major help; yet TD makes do with no more than one significant addition a year, while at the same time losing starters such as Rueben and Jennings; i.e. status quo. Number four: TD's drafts have often left a lot to be desired.

 

Or perhaps it's just a Buffalo thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Bobby Beathard was GM of the Redskins, true, he had a hell of a coach in Joe Gibbs.  But he also had a philosophy, which he stuck to, that the players he brings in have to have smarts and discipline.  It helped get him three Super Bowl rings.

 

Than there's the Bills.  Year after year of one dumb penalty after another (Clements today, for instance.  Momentum, or any semblence of it, continuallly lost, game after game. 

 

Of course, Beathard also was a great judge of talent, which I always thought Donahoe had when he was the Steelers GM.  Remember, Pittsburgh, continually lost more quality free agents than other team, yet always managed to draft well as they continued to win.  So was it magic or luck? 

 

I've totally turned on TD, for four primary reasons.  Number one: Greg Williams.  Number two: the starting quarterbacks he has brought in have, thus far, proven to be disasters, at significant cost.  Number three: everyone knows that the OL needs major help; yet TD makes do with no more than one significant addition a year, while at the same time losing starters such as Rueben and Jennings; i.e. status quo.  Number four: TD's drafts have often left a lot to be desired.

 

Or perhaps it's just a Buffalo thing.

462464[/snapback]

That last sentence was very telling. "Just a Buffalo thing" By your usage here, it has a clear negative connotation. . . interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That last sentence was very telling. "Just a Buffalo thing" By your usage here, it has a clear negative connotation. . . interesting

462509[/snapback]

It's not meant to mean anything other than we can't catch a break, whether it's "The Miracle" lateral, the penalty on the hail mary, Thurman's helmet, the last play of last years opener, or "no goal." We seem to be perpetually jinxed. Perhaps TD's prior history of success ends when he moves to Buffalo. I would hope, realistically, that Buffalo's house is not really haunted. But it certainly appears to be at times.

 

I am not sure that Donahoe is the answer, for the reasons cited in the post, is what I am really saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not meant to mean anything other than we can't catch a break, whether it's "The Miracle" lateral, the penalty on the hail mary, Thurman's helmet, the last play of last years opener, or "no goal."  We seem to be perpetually jinxed.  Perhaps TD's prior history of success ends when he moves to Buffalo.  I would hope, realistically, that Buffalo's house is not really haunted.  But it certainly appears to be at times. 

 

I am not sure that Donahoe is the answer, for the reasons cited in the post, is what I am really saying.

463176[/snapback]

 

I am thinking along those lines too.

 

Really, but for that stretch in the 90s, the Bills haven't done ANYTHING to write home about in their abysmal near-50 year history.

 

The Sabres OTOH have at least shown a history of decent performance.

 

And people wonder why I started rootign for the Yankees. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am thinking along those lines too.

 

Really, but for that stretch in the 90s, the Bills haven't done ANYTHING to write home about in their abysmal near-50 year history.

 

463195[/snapback]

 

Exactly...and if you dig you'll find my post talking about the one constant in that history....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly...and if you dig you'll find my post talking about the one constant in that history....

463240[/snapback]

 

That being mediocrity?

 

Look, Bills fans are a delusional bunch. (Myself included). You HAVE to be delusional to root for a team like the Bills. By and large, they've been the laughingstock of the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

linky-poo

463248[/snapback]

 

That's kind of what I'm getting at.

 

Ralph doesn't have the fiscal werewithal to compete with modern owners.

 

If you don't have the bling, you'd better bring it with a top-notch scouting department.

 

We don't have that, therefore the team suffers for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's kind of what I'm getting at.

 

Ralph doesn't have the fiscal werewithal to compete with modern owners.

 

If you don't have the bling, you'd better bring it with a top-notch scouting department.

 

We don't have that, therefore the team suffers for it.

463254[/snapback]

 

I don't think not having money is the issue with Ralph as much as it's not wanting to spend the money - and spend it in the right places. Up until the Super Bowl run, Ralph was a major cheapskate. Now, he's much less reluctant to spend the $$$ on players. The evidence is in the team's payrolls each year since the salary cap began, where we are routinely up to the allowed spending limit. The coaching staff on the other hand....

 

Yeah, it's all something to think about before we get upset each year when the NFL chooses not to put Ralph in the HOF. Ralphie's been good to the league's development and good to the city of Buffalo, but I can think of about 20 NFL franchises that have had a more successful overall history than the Bills :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am thinking along those lines too.

 

Really, but for that stretch in the 90s, the Bills haven't done ANYTHING to write home about in their abysmal near-50 year history.

 

The Sabres OTOH have at least shown a history of decent performance.

 

And people wonder why I started rootign for the Yankees. :blink:

463195[/snapback]

Yesterday was just a bad day all around. As a lifelong Indians fan, who has always hated the Yankees, I said to my wife last night that it probably would be simpler if I just started rooting for the Yankees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The coaching staff on the other hand....

 

 

463280[/snapback]

And, as I'm suggesting, probably the GM as well. Donahoe probably came cheap, as he had been fired and was out of work for a while.

 

And, of course, a successful coaching staff may not necessarily be expensive. You just have to make the right decisions. Alternatives to Greg Williams, for instance, such as Weiss, Fox, or even Lewis, may not have cost you much more, if that, than Williams did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am thinking along those lines too.

 

Really, but for that stretch in the 90s, the Bills haven't done ANYTHING to write home about in their abysmal near-50 year history.

 

The Sabres OTOH have at least shown a history of decent performance.

 

And people wonder why I started rootign for the Yankees. :blink:

463195[/snapback]

 

The game against the Titans in 2000 didn't help. It might have been right to start rebuilding then but the way we have rebuilded is mind boggling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...