JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Mularkey - He is where the Giants coach was last year. Despite any statements to the contrary, it's all about next year now. He's got to get his youngsters some game experience and some data for off-season evaluation. Moulds - he said it early in the year: "I want to win now". I think he knew even then that this would be his last year here so he has absolutely no interest in the long-term success of Losman or the franchise. Since it's now pretty much painfully obvious that there are no playoffs in the immediate Bills future, he's basically playing for his next contract. So Moulds needs stats and Mularkey isn't inclined to give them to him. Add to that the fact that Moulds stabbed the guy with control of the ball (Losman) in the back, and it looks like Moulds is up shitz creek without a paddle. Don't get me wrong - I have a Moulds jersey and I've loved what Moulds has done for the team for the last 10 years, but I'm going to support the guy with the long-term interests of the team at heart, not the guy worried about his next contract somewhere else.
Tortured Soul Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Mularkey - He is where the Giants coach was last year. Despite any statements to the contrary, it's all about next year now. He's got to get his youngsters some game experience and some data for off-season evaluation. Moulds - he said it early in the year: "I want to win now". I think he knew even then that this would be his last year here so he has absolutely no interest in the long-term success of Losman or the franchise. Since it's now pretty much painfully obvious that there are no playoffs in the immediate Bills future, he's basically playing for his next contract. So Moulds needs stats and Mularkey isn't inclined to give them to him. Add to that the fact that Moulds stabbed the guy with control of the ball (Losman) in the back, and it looks like Moulds is up shitz creek without a paddle. Don't get me wrong - I have a Moulds jersey and I've loved what Moulds has done for the team for the last 10 years, but I'm going to support the guy with the long-term interests of the team at heart, not the guy worried about his next contract somewhere else. 524666[/snapback] So do you think Moulds did anything wrong? If Moulds isn't part of his plan, why should he play? He might as well sit on the bench, right? Comparing them to the Giants last year, Eli replaced Warner, but I'm can't remember anything comparable to Moulds.
ChasBB Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Mularkey - He is where the Giants coach was last year. Despite any statements to the contrary, it's all about next year now. He's got to get his youngsters some game experience and some data for off-season evaluation. Moulds - he said it early in the year: "I want to win now". I think he knew even then that this would be his last year here so he has absolutely no interest in the long-term success of Losman or the franchise. Since it's now pretty much painfully obvious that there are no playoffs in the immediate Bills future, he's basically playing for his next contract. So Moulds needs stats and Mularkey isn't inclined to give them to him. Add to that the fact that Moulds stabbed the guy with control of the ball (Losman) in the back, and it looks like Moulds is up shitz creek without a paddle. Don't get me wrong - I have a Moulds jersey and I've loved what Moulds has done for the team for the last 10 years, but I'm going to support the guy with the long-term interests of the team at heart, not the guy worried about his next contract somewhere else. 524666[/snapback] Very well said! I'd also add that Moulds knew who the starting quarterback was going to be and he chose to not work with JP in the offseason. If Moulds was so concerned about winning this season, then maybe he should have considered getting to know his QB a little better, work out timing, etc. Moulds has definitely been a very good player for this team, but it's time to move on.
Tortured Soul Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Very well said! I'd also add that Moulds knew who the starting quarterback was going to be and he chose to not work with JP in the offseason. If Moulds was so concerned about winning this season, then maybe he should have considered getting to know his QB a little better, work out timing, etc. Moulds has definitely been a very good player for this team, but it's time to move on. 524673[/snapback] You're accusing Moulds of not having faith in JP even before the season began?
bflo83 Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Mularkey - He is where the Giants coach was last year. Despite any statements to the contrary, it's all about next year now. He's got to get his youngsters some game experience and some data for off-season evaluation. Moulds - he said it early in the year: "I want to win now". I think he knew even then that this would be his last year here so he has absolutely no interest in the long-term success of Losman or the franchise. Since it's now pretty much painfully obvious that there are no playoffs in the immediate Bills future, he's basically playing for his next contract. So Moulds needs stats and Mularkey isn't inclined to give them to him. Add to that the fact that Moulds stabbed the guy with control of the ball (Losman) in the back, and it looks like Moulds is up shitz creek without a paddle. Don't get me wrong - I have a Moulds jersey and I've loved what Moulds has done for the team for the last 10 years, but I'm going to support the guy with the long-term interests of the team at heart, not the guy worried about his next contract somewhere else. 524666[/snapback] My problem with Mularkey is that he hasn't shown me the leadership we saw last year. When the team started out like crap and RW started making comments to the press about the offense, Mularkey stayed the course and didn't make any change in philosophy. Granted he rode Willis' hot hand and a weak schedule to a strong second half of the year but he still deserves some credit for the team's success in 04. Fast forward to this year. The team cuts Drew and annoints JP as the future and then promptly pulls the plug after four games partly as a result of the pressure from veterans like Moulds and Adams who want to win now. I believe that JP will be a good quarterback in this league - possibly a great one - and while I feel he has benefitted from his time on the sidelines it was still four games worth of experience that he missed due to the waffling of the coaches and management.
ChasBB Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 You're accusing Moulds of not having faith in JP even before the season began? 524678[/snapback] I don't know what Moulds' opinion of JP was before the season. I only stated that Moulds chose not to work with JP in the offseason. You can read anything you like into that, but the point I was attempting to make is that perhaps Moulds was not all that concerned with "winning now". If he was, then he would have (and should have) made a committment in the offseason to work as much as possible with his new QB, but he chose not to.
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted December 8, 2005 Author Posted December 8, 2005 So do you think Moulds did anything wrong? If Moulds isn't part of his plan, why should he play? He might as well sit on the bench, right? Comparing them to the Giants last year, Eli replaced Warner, but I'm can't remember anything comparable to Moulds. 524671[/snapback] If it's true that he did quit and refused to go in when directed by a coach to do so, then hell yeah he did something wrong. He should play because that's what he's getting paid a buttload of money for. He should play because other teams might view him as a quitter (rightly or wrongly) now. He should play because he's fukking up his legacy.
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted December 8, 2005 Author Posted December 8, 2005 My problem with Mularkey is that he hasn't shown me the leadership we saw last year. When the team started out like crap and RW started making comments to the press about the offense, Mularkey stayed the course and didn't make any change in philosophy. Granted he rode Willis' hot hand and a weak schedule to a strong second half of the year but he still deserves some credit for the team's success in 04. Fast forward to this year. The team cuts Drew and annoints JP as the future and then promptly pulls the plug after four games partly as a result of the pressure from veterans like Moulds and Adams who want to win now. I believe that JP will be a good quarterback in this league - possibly a great one - and while I feel he has benefitted from his time on the sidelines it was still four games worth of experience that he missed due to the waffling of the coaches and management. 524680[/snapback] The biggest problem with the way the appeasement of the veterans came down was the Moulds went public before Mularkey did. Had he kept his trap shut and let Mularkey handle it, as he should have, then I think things would be much "cleaner" now.
MDH Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Mularkey - He is where the Giants coach was last year. Despite any statements to the contrary, it's all about next year now. He's got to get his youngsters some game experience and some data for off-season evaluation. Moulds - he said it early in the year: "I want to win now". I think he knew even then that this would be his last year here so he has absolutely no interest in the long-term success of Losman or the franchise. Since it's now pretty much painfully obvious that there are no playoffs in the immediate Bills future, he's basically playing for his next contract. So Moulds needs stats and Mularkey isn't inclined to give them to him. Add to that the fact that Moulds stabbed the guy with control of the ball (Losman) in the back, and it looks like Moulds is up shitz creek without a paddle. Don't get me wrong - I have a Moulds jersey and I've loved what Moulds has done for the team for the last 10 years, but I'm going to support the guy with the long-term interests of the team at heart, not the guy worried about his next contract somewhere else. 524666[/snapback] I'd say Mularkey has more interest in winning now than Moulds. Moulds is gone after this year plain and simple. He'll get a contract with somebody and moderate signing bonus no matter what transpires the rest of the season. If Mularkey doesn't do something to stop the bleeding (i.e. win now) he has a shot at being canned at the season's end and might never get another shot to be a head coach again.
Tortured Soul Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 I don't know what Moulds' opinion of JP was before the season. I only stated that Moulds chose not to work with JP in the offseason. You can read anything you like into that, but the point I was attempting to make is that perhaps Moulds was not all that concerned with "winning now". If he was, then he would have (and should have) made a committment in the offseason to work as much as possible with his new QB, but he chose not to. 524684[/snapback] I thought from the way you said "Moulds knew who the starting QB would be" you thought it was personal. Sorry if I misunderstood. If it's true that he did quit and refused to go in when directed by a coach to do so, then hell yeah he did something wrong. He should play because that's what he's getting paid a buttload of money for. He should play because other teams might view him as a quitter (rightly or wrongly) now. He should play because he's fukking up his legacy. 524685[/snapback] I think you're playing it both ways - saying that the season is all about next year, which doesn't include Moulds, but then saying the team is paying him to play. Well, what is the team paying him for? Not to win, as you said, he's not part of that plan. So, I think the team basically has him there because cutting him today doesn't save any money, but they're not paying him to play. I think any situation in which it is made clear to a player that he's just riding out the end of the season, such as Adams, he has very little motivation to play. And when you say other teams will view him as a quitter, that may be better than being viewed as an over-30 receiver who doesn't catch any passes.
KOKBILLS Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 If it's true that he did quit and refused to go in when directed by a coach to do so, then hell yeah he did something wrong. 524685[/snapback] Well that assertion is being strongly denied by Moulds and his Agent...So for me personally I'm not going to assume a guy like EM would all of a sudden refuse to go in a Game after 10 Years of pretty consistant on-the-field service... If that is the case (Moulds just refusing to go in) then EM was being a big baby and deserves a suspension...No matter how much I can't stand Mularkey you can't accept that type of insubordination... As far as taking Mularkey's side cause he's looking out for the future of the Team I would agree if in fact that future included a new Head Coach...
cåblelady Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 I don't know what Moulds' opinion of JP was before the season. I only stated that Moulds chose not to work with JP in the offseason. You can read anything you like into that, but the point I was attempting to make is that perhaps Moulds was not all that concerned with "winning now". If he was, then he would have (and should have) made a committment in the offseason to work as much as possible with his new QB, but he chose not to. 524684[/snapback] He let JP borrow his truck. Cindy and I saw it.
stevewin Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Mularkey stayed the course and didn't make any change in philosophy. You know - it's funny - Mularkey was lauded last year for 'staying the course' after the bad start - and his famous quote was that he told the players "There is no Plan B" - which can be interpreted as a strong statement that they would follow the original plan. Now - with some of the shine off Mularkey's ability to manage and adjust - one could (more cynically) wonder if "There is no Plan B" was meant to be literally interpretd - "I don't have another plan and I can't come up with one"...
Mark VI Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 You know - it's funny - Mularkey was lauded last year for 'staying the course' after the bad start - and his famous quote was that he told the players "There is no Plan B" - which can be interpreted as a strong statement that they would follow the original plan. Now - with some of the shine off Mularkey's ability to manage and adjust - one could (more cynically) wonder if "There is no Plan B" was meant to be literally interpretd - "I don't have another plan and I can't come up with one"... 524768[/snapback] Thank you. His inability to adjust during the game is the worst in the NFL. Nice guy but you can literally see the deer antlers growing out of his head as the game progresses. That's when you lose your roster.
Fixxxer Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 I really like Moulds and all he has done for the franchise. But you guys remember the "It's my team" line by Bledsoe at the end of the season where Moulds spinned it out of it like a master. To follow that with and I quote: "JP made great plays against our defense in practice" He's the one wanting for a change in the offseason and 6 months later he was all about winning and what not to approach Mularkey for a change at QB. Becareful what you wish for Eric, you just migh get it.
East Brady Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Mularkey - He is where the Giants coach was last year. Despite any statements to the contrary, it's all about next year now. He's got to get his youngsters some game experience and some data for off-season evaluation. Moulds - he said it early in the year: "I want to win now". I think he knew even then that this would be his last year here so he has absolutely no interest in the long-term success of Losman or the franchise. Since it's now pretty much painfully obvious that there are no playoffs in the immediate Bills future, he's basically playing for his next contract. So Moulds needs stats and Mularkey isn't inclined to give them to him. Add to that the fact that Moulds stabbed the guy with control of the ball (Losman) in the back, and it looks like Moulds is up shitz creek without a paddle. Don't get me wrong - I have a Moulds jersey and I've loved what Moulds has done for the team for the last 10 years, but I'm going to support the guy with the long-term interests of the team at heart, not the guy worried about his next contract somewhere else. 524666[/snapback] From the Roch. D&C ..............Paybacks are a B----------CH!!!! "I'm sure he has good reason," Losman said. "Ever since I've been here, he hasn't lied to us or told us things that we as players don't want to hear or we don't agree with. "As long as I've known him, he's been doing the right thing. If that's the decision he's going to make, we as a team collectively have to agree with that and back him. Hopefully we as a team all learn from why he's doing something or why he feels he needs to do something." To a man, the Bills claimed their focus is solely on Sunday's game against the two-time defending Super Bowl champion Patriots (7-5), who can clinch the AFC East for the fourth time in five years. "We're preparing to play the Patriots this weekend, and it was business as usual today," linebacker London Fletcher said. "Naturally as a friend you're concerned for your fellow teammates, but it's something the coach is going to handle. "Mike Mularkey is the head coach of this football team, and any decision he makes you support it and you concern yourself first and foremost with doing your job as a player."
GG Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 So do you think Moulds did anything wrong? If Moulds isn't part of his plan, why should he play? He might as well sit on the bench, right? Comparing them to the Giants last year, Eli replaced Warner, but I'm can't remember anything comparable to Moulds. 524671[/snapback] Giants veterans were on a verge of a revolt vs Coughlin as well. Difference being that Coughlin has the gray hairs to back his stance vs veterans (and didn't have to worry about lack of support from the ownership). Most important difference was that Coughlin needed the eventual support of the veterans that he had alienated, while Mularkey is facing guys who are on their way out. What I don't understand is the call for a tougher disciplinarian among the masses, but when Mularkey draws a hard line on insubordination, this place goes wild.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Winning clears up everything, losing inflames everything. We're in this position because of the loss last Sunday and the team's fourth quarter collapses more than Moulds or Mularkey's actions, egos or futures.
KOKBILLS Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Winning clears up everything, losing inflames everything. We're in this position because of the loss last Sunday and the team's fourth quarter collapses more than Moulds or Mularkey's actions, egos or futures. 524951[/snapback] Well that is certainly spot on...No question you are correct...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted December 8, 2005 Posted December 8, 2005 Winning clears up everything, losing inflames everything. We're in this position because of the loss last Sunday and the team's fourth quarter collapses more than Moulds or Mularkey's actions, egos or futures. 524951[/snapback] Now don't go trying to be rational. Here's a torch and pitchfork, I've got the tar and feathers. Let's storm the barricades and round up Ole' Whitey and his minions!
Recommended Posts