nick in* england Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 I've listend to all the comments and assumptions and speculation recently about MM/TD and the changes that are on the way. While a GREAT deal of people insist that there is going to be a complete overhaul at OBD, I think more likely there will be 1 to 3 key changes over the coming months. And one of those ought NOT be to fire Mularky. MM had a better team to work with last year and scored a 9-7 season. With poorer tools he has done a worse job. Now a great deal of this is down to MM for sure, but the influence of TD is there and we would do well to tweak at the top and let MM have one more year. If the new GM is unhappy with MM after that year he can move MM on... In all reality tho - we need an experience HC to come in - and there aren't going to be any sensible choices... So we'd be faced with long-time OCs or college coaches - none of whom I believe would be an upgrade over MM. I think we need a new OC and a new DC and a new GM. Some of that can be fixed with internal promotions (Whyche OC? Modrak?) others can't (maybe Modrak isn't a great idea)... I for one believe MM should be retained one more year - and I don't think it is a forgone conclusion that he leaves at the year end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 I've listend to all the comments and assumptions and speculation recently about MM/TD and the changes that are on the way. While a GREAT deal of people insist that there is going to be a complete overhaul at OBD, I think more likely there will be 1 to 3 key changes over the coming months. And one of those ought NOT be to fire Mularky. MM had a better team to work with last year and scored a 9-7 season. With poorer tools he has done a worse job. Now a great deal of this is down to MM for sure, but the influence of TD is there and we would do well to tweak at the top and let MM have one more year. If the new GM is unhappy with MM after that year he can move MM on... In all reality tho - we need an experience HC to come in - and there aren't going to be any sensible choices... So we'd be faced with long-time OCs or college coaches - none of whom I believe would be an upgrade over MM. I think we need a new OC and a new DC and a new GM. Some of that can be fixed with internal promotions (Whyche OC? Modrak?) others can't (maybe Modrak isn't a great idea)... I for one believe MM should be retained one more year - and I don't think it is a forgone conclusion that he leaves at the year end. 533891[/snapback] I really don't know, Nick. I don't think you can make all the decisions he's made on the field, making the same dumb mistakes, hang Eric Moulds out to dry in the media, play musical QBs, and not expect to lose your job. Maybe if two new coordinators were in there, things would be better. But right now he is calling the shots and failing, big time. And I think he might be losing this team, despite all comments to the contrary. A real coach is going to make Willis McGahee get with the program, not because he makes him feel bad in the media or in the locker room, but because he gives him something to believe in. I'm not sure Mularkey gives this team anything to believe in, or that he has a clear strategy that he HIMSELF believes in. That's critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 I don't think we move forward at all with MM as head coach. He has really lost credibility and respect from many of the senior players on the team, his inability to react to whatever any team throws at him is obvious in pretty much every game he coaches, and I don't see him being able to reform the team. You have a point in that this is not the most attractive head coach job. I think we are best off looking for someone new who, with a new GM will rebuild with a core team whose quality players are on their last legs and many other players who are unproven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 Poor/no decisions, poor leadership, dreadful play calling, cone of silence, crappy speaker, has not earned team's respect, blame game...gotta disagree Nick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 No. No-no-no. The new GM will want his own coach, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 if willis didn't come off the bench to rescue the bills O last year mularky would be about 10 games below 500 right now. the funny thing is they took 4 games to start willis. this year they start losman, instead of holcom, and losman was clearly not ready. MM is the guy on both those choices and he just blew it. that mixed with a lack of adjustments shows me a coach who has no effing clue what he is doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted December 16, 2005 Author Share Posted December 16, 2005 But he was saddled with a bust of a RT, has had to suffer the loss of the best player on the team this year, and the loss of the starting DT (regardless of skill, losing starters hurts). I don't know - there are a bunch of factors that crop up when you assess Mularky that say to me that the problems are not completly down to him and excuse his performance... to a degree I also think the Moulds situation is different - and looking at how he has consistently handles Sam Adams the past 2 years tell me he can manage the vets. Moulds I think has been posturing for a season or two to get out of town - saw his opportunity this year and is doing everything to take it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 But he was saddled with a bust of a RT, has had to suffer the loss of the best player on the team this year, and the loss of the starting DT (regardless of skill, losing starters hurts). I don't know - there are a bunch of factors that crop up when you assess Mularky that say to me that the problems are not completly down to him and excuse his performance... to a degree I also think the Moulds situation is different - and looking at how he has consistently handles Sam Adams the past 2 years tell me he can manage the vets. Moulds I think has been posturing for a season or two to get out of town - saw his opportunity this year and is doing everything to take it.... 533924[/snapback] Wow Nick. One tour of the facillities and you've become a company schill. Somebody call a deprogrammer. Ole Whitey and his minions got to Nick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 But he was saddled with a bust of a RT, has had to suffer the loss of the best player on the team this year, and the loss of the starting DT (regardless of skill, losing starters hurts). I don't know - there are a bunch of factors that crop up when you assess Mularky that say to me that the problems are not completly down to him and excuse his performance... to a degree I also think the Moulds situation is different - and looking at how he has consistently handles Sam Adams the past 2 years tell me he can manage the vets. Moulds I think has been posturing for a season or two to get out of town - saw his opportunity this year and is doing everything to take it.... 533924[/snapback] Remember, when you assess you make an ass out of ess. I just don't see it Nick, not even a flicker that he can do the job. He might grow into a HC, but I don't think it will happen soon, or with our beloved team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 Nick, you may have a point here. Any coach, when handed a roster like this, would have had a losing season. As for the points people have raised against him: - I'm not going to judge the Eric Moulds situation, because we don't know the whole story. - Not to pull a Greggg, but it's easy for your playcalling to look lousy when your players can't execute. - Besides that, Mularkey is doing two men's jobs: his own and Tom Clements'. Whenver that's the case, it's easy to look lousy in both. Promote Sam Wyche to offensive coordinator and the problem is solved. - Taking four games to start Willis was a good move for two reasons: it gave him more time to get back to full strength, and it made him appreciate his starting position more when he had to earn it. - The Losman flip-flops were Losman's own fault for playing as poorly as he did in games 2 - 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 I've listend to all the comments and assumptions and speculation recently about MM/TD and the changes that are on the way. While a GREAT deal of people insist that there is going to be a complete overhaul at OBD, I think more likely there will be 1 to 3 key changes over the coming months. And one of those ought NOT be to fire Mularky. MM had a better team to work with last year and scored a 9-7 season. With poorer tools he has done a worse job. Now a great deal of this is down to MM for sure, but the influence of TD is there and we would do well to tweak at the top and let MM have one more year. If the new GM is unhappy with MM after that year he can move MM on... In all reality tho - we need an experience HC to come in - and there aren't going to be any sensible choices... So we'd be faced with long-time OCs or college coaches - none of whom I believe would be an upgrade over MM. I think we need a new OC and a new DC and a new GM. Some of that can be fixed with internal promotions (Whyche OC? Modrak?) others can't (maybe Modrak isn't a great idea)... I for one believe MM should be retained one more year - and I don't think it is a forgone conclusion that he leaves at the year end. 533891[/snapback] I also support keeping MM and canning TD. He has just had 2 years to prove himself with a dismal set of players. He should get another year at least with a talented roster. Also, am not convinced that every GM comes in with the intent of replacing the HC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 His playcalling has been dreadful both seasons. Our D and ST's couldn't carry us this season. Lacks zero ability to adjust during the game. Nice guy, but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 I also support keeping MM and canning TD. He has just had 2 years to prove himself with a dismal set of players. He should get another year at least with a talented roster.Also, am not convinced that every GM comes in with the intent of replacing the HC. 533942[/snapback] Come on, Chicago! He could have still won about 3-4 more games with this dismal roster if he (and Gray) had made some better decisions! This staff is shite, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted December 16, 2005 Author Share Posted December 16, 2005 Wow Nick. One tour of the facillities and you've become a company schill. Somebody call a deprogrammer. Ole Whitey and his minions got to Nick. 533931[/snapback] No but I did get a flavour of what the truth is that is out there and the actual truth and they are vastly different... I have said openly for a while now that I would prefer to hang on to MM... My faith in that was tested on Sunday when I saw his Press Conf for real - but I am back with him... The best shot to win is to get rid of TD restructure one or both of the coordinator positions and get some linemen in here... If MM can go back to being the HC, not the OC too, I think it'll be back on the right course... Additionally - I really haven't been sold on any of the touted replacements. The guy who replaces his MUST be experienced as a HC in the NFL - and there aren't any around. In that eventuality - why not stick with our guy and let him continue to develop as a Head Coach rather than bin him only 2 years into a 5 year agreement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted December 16, 2005 Author Share Posted December 16, 2005 His playcalling has been dreadful both seasons. Our D and ST's couldn't carry us this season. Lacks zero ability to adjust during the game. Nice guy, but... 533946[/snapback] The in-game adjustments I agree with - but he could do it in Pittsburgh with a successful O there... couldn't he?? His playcalling has sucked this year - yeah - but he only took over mid-season, and even then has been calling plays for a bunch of guys that can't get sh-t all blocked, a qb that is suffereing as a result of essenitally rookie jitters and poor line play, and a bunch of guys that gave up in week 3 when the team's leader got injured. Ditching Drew and going with Losman can be the downfall of TD, but I don't want it to be the downfall of MM - because with a good OL and a better OC, I think MM has the ingredients to take this team into the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 We would do well to trust Ralph and other members of the organization itself to decide the fate of our head coach. Many, if not most of the things said here on this board and on the radio about MM (leadership issues, "lost the team", "schill", etc.) are complete , 100 % ASSumptions made by people who are not in the know as to what the real situation is. The only thing we can really see is that his play calling this season left something to be desired. Some may think they know these other things listed above, but truly they do not. And that's part of what makes this a tough time being a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 In that eventuality - why not stick with our guy and let him continue to develop as a Head Coach rather than bin him only 2 years into a 5 year agreement? 533949[/snapback] Because the players hate him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 Because the players hate him. 533959[/snapback] A perfect and timely example of what I discussed in the post above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted December 16, 2005 Author Share Posted December 16, 2005 We would do well to trust Ralph and other members of the organization itself to decide the fate of our head coach. Many, if not most of the things said here on this board and on the radio about MM (leadership issues, "lost the team", "schill", etc.) are complete , 100 % ASSumptions made by people who are not in the know as to what the real situation is. The only thing we can really see is that his play calling this season left something top be desired. Some may think they know these other things listed above, but truly they do not. And that's part of what makes this a tough time being a fan. 533957[/snapback] Nice call... but this is essentially why I am backing MM, because I don't by all the speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted December 16, 2005 Author Share Posted December 16, 2005 Because the players hate him. 533959[/snapback] They do?? Sorry - but at no point have I gotten that impression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts