Fan in Chicago Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 No, had he done what I suggested there would have been no hoopla and it would have all been taken care of in house. Nobody would have even known that Moulds woulnd't have been starting (or playing) until gameday. And if you don't think Ralph flying into to okay a decision is a sign that the coach doesn't have much power I don't know what to say to you. This situation would have been taken care of by the coach and the GM anywhere else in the league. 526231[/snapback] What I was implying is that MM has not been given this authority by RW. Also, TD seems to have been cut out of the action (public anyway). So I think blaming MM for creating a 'mess' is incorrect. He was handling it diplomatically and RW decided he had to come in and tell EM whatsup. Finally, how would everyone react if EM's suspension was announced on game day ? MM is as it is being roasted for dragging this issue on !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 My two questions are: What did Moulds do? and How should have Mularkey handled it? 525841[/snapback] Hopefully we'll never know- lets just watch some football!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Hopefully we'll never know- lets just watch some football!!!! 526472[/snapback] Good advice Adam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfanone Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 I don't know what Moulds did, though I heard one person's account from the team. That said, I think Mularkey handled it wrong. I think Jimmy Johnson said it best during his Super Bowl years: all players are not created equal. He pointed out that if the backup tight end walked in late to a meeting, he'd cut his as$ on the spot. If Troy Aikman did the same thing, he'd do nothing. Therein lies the problem, in my opinion. In terms of seniority and overall team standing (every player respects the crap out of him), Moulds is second to none. It would take an egregious act for him to be suspended and IMO, a sideline argument does not qualify. I loved what Mularkey did about Bobby Shaw last year. He was a sacrificial lamb and it worked out well becuase he meant nothing to the team. To discipline Moulds and suspend him without pay is an overreaction if you ask me. 525852[/snapback] Parcells said the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kultarr Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Let's see what we do know... 1) Adams disagreed with Mularkey about being made inactive and left before kickoff without any repurcussions. 2) Moulds had a dispute of sorts with the coaches on the sidelines and did not play most of the game last week. 3) Moulds criticized the play calling. 4) Moulds agent claims Moulds was hurt. 5) It was reported that Moulds missed a meeting with Mularkey *and* Mularkey was quoted as saying he and Eric had a good conversation. (Hint: someone is wrong here.) 6) Moulds was excused (newspeak for told not to attend) practices this week. 7) Moulds had to chat with Wilson before any official suspension. ___ Let's read the tea leaves now. It's crystal clear that Mularkey is on the verge of losing this team. Players are walking out of the stadium, possibly taking themselves out of games, questioning the play calling. Not just random no-name players, but the veteran leadership of the team. We have other players saying to reporters that the clubhouse is "in chaos" and so on. Mularkey may be feeling things slipping through his fingers. He's not getting great effort on the field and he's not getting much respect off the field. The Moulds situation may be nothing but timing and frustration. Moulds frustrated with the coaching, the way the season has soured, how he may be leaving Buffalo on a major sour note. Mularkey frustrated because the team is disintegrating around him, he's losing games badly, and he's losing his players. ___ On the handling of this. No question, this situation was horribly botched. If it's "in house", it shouldn't be across the front page of the paper! Everybody knows that. Once it was leaked that Moulds may be suspended, Mularkey should've cleared the issue and made a decision. (It's the 21st century people; ever heard of a phone?) Either make an example of Moulds (and get permission if that's truly the way it's done in Buffalo -- which really speaks volumes) or talk to Moulds as two honorable men and settle it between themselves. I don't know what really happened to cause Moulds to "blow up" nor to cause Mularkey to "blow up". But it is clear that everyone takes a blackeye on this one and "we don't want it to become a T.O. situation" may be the intention but clearly not how things have played out. Moulds looks like a crybaby, malcontent. Mularkey looks like a powerless head coach. Donahoe looks like he's asleep at the wheel of a ship sinking beneath the waves. Wilson looks like a meddling owner. Or rather, a father figure who can't figure out how its gotten so bad that two of his kids are feuding with each other... And the Buffalo Bills are a brutal, mismanaged laughingstock. Bad things. Bad business. Ultimately, the buck stops with Ralph and it surely looks like his people have let him down in a big way. He's going to have to make some difficult decisions in a few weeks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Let's see what we do know... 1) Adams disagreed with Mularkey about being made inactive and left before kickoff without any repurcussions. 2) Moulds had a dispute of sorts with the coaches on the sidelines and did not play most of the game last week. 3) Moulds criticized the play calling. 4) Moulds agent claims Moulds was hurt. 5) It was reported that Moulds missed a meeting with Mularkey *and* Mularkey was quoted as saying he and Eric had a good conversation. (Hint: someone is wrong here.) 6) Moulds was excused (newspeak for told not to attend) practices this week. 7) Moulds had to chat with Wilson before any official suspension. ___ Let's read the tea leaves now. It's crystal clear that Mularkey is on the verge of losing this team. Players are walking out of the stadium, possibly taking themselves out of games, questioning the play calling. Not just random no-name players, but the veteran leadership of the team. We have other players saying to reporters that the clubhouse is "in chaos" and so on. Mularkey may be feeling things slipping through his fingers. He's not getting great effort on the field and he's not getting much respect off the field. The Moulds situation may be nothing but timing and frustration. Moulds frustrated with the coaching, the way the season has soured, how he may be leaving Buffalo on a major sour note. Mularkey frustrated because the team is disintegrating around him, he's losing games badly, and he's losing his players. ___ On the handling of this. No question, this situation was horribly botched. If it's "in house", it shouldn't be across the front page of the paper! Everybody knows that. Once it was leaked that Moulds may be suspended, Mularkey should've cleared the issue and made a decision. (It's the 21st century people; ever heard of a phone?) Either make an example of Moulds (and get permission if that's truly the way it's done in Buffalo -- which really speaks volumes) or talk to Moulds as two honorable men and settle it between themselves. I don't know what really happened to cause Moulds to "blow up" nor to cause Mularkey to "blow up". But it is clear that everyone takes a blackeye on this one and "we don't want it to become a T.O. situation" may be the intention but clearly not how things have played out. Moulds looks like a crybaby, malcontent. Mularkey looks like a powerless head coach. Donahoe looks like he's asleep at the wheel of a ship sinking beneath the waves. Wilson looks like a meddling owner. Or rather, a father figure who can't figure out how its gotten so bad that two of his kids are feuding with each other... And the Buffalo Bills are a brutal, mismanaged laughingstock. Bad things. Bad business. Ultimately, the buck stops with Ralph and it surely looks like his people have let him down in a big way. He's going to have to make some difficult decisions in a few weeks... 526531[/snapback] Great post, nice summary and analysis.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
***PetrinoInAlbany*** Posted December 9, 2005 Share Posted December 9, 2005 Not entirely ... If the version of the story is true that he felt a twinge in his achilles tendon and removed himself for that, then the coach ordered a player back into a game who believed he was injured. Say what you want about the broad range of "how 'hurt' is hurt" possibilities ... but if this thing went to a grievance tomorrow, Moulds would win in a slam-dunk. Guaranteed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts