Buftex Posted December 26, 2005 Posted December 26, 2005 that they might be back for another season. Other than the Modrak rumour, I have not heard one "NFL insider" speculate about who would replace either, or both, of these guys, if they were to be let go. They usually all have ideas about who will go where, but not with the Bills. That leads me to believe that Ralph is not busy making lots of phone calls about the teams future. If he was, you would think that one of these guys might have heard something, through one of their "leauge sources". You know that when people are supposed to keep things "secret", they always tell at least one person... I know that "insiders" pass speculation off as information, but virtually every "insider" I have heard mention the Bills situation says essentially the same thing: "Mularkey will likely be back, TD could get his walking papers, but, they likely won't find anyone better to replace him." The assumption seems to be that Ralphs' age will somehow play a roll in his firing TD, and frankly, I just don't see that. If anything, a major change like that is more likely to set the team back, than help it move forward. Either way, I guess we will know a lot more in another week....the suspense is killing me...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 26, 2005 Posted December 26, 2005 I think fans are way too quick to just make knee-jerk decisions about everything and while some people (stupidly, IMO) say i know all I need to know after two games of Losman or six games of Holcomb or 10 games of the team, a person that actually has the job of running the team might want to actually let the season play out until it is over, evaluate what happened, talk to a few friends in the know, speak with his GM and coach to get their side of the story, and then make a decision based on all of the factors. Sunday didn't change the fact that this team is 5-10. We have sucked. We have been terribly coached. Our players let us down and their coach down repeatedly. Our GM didnt stock the team with the right group of winners and players at all the positions. But Sunday, to me, showed me what we should have been seeing all along. My read on it is that it just shows how little difference there is in the talent level of the teams in the league. I do not believe this was an on any given sunday type deal. This is the way the team should have been playing all along. I think that Mularkey himself flat blew a couple games with bad play-calling. I think the players just sucked a couple games, or choked a few times they should have made the play that changed the outcome of 3-4 games this year. I think the loss of Fat Pat, the inability of Ron Edwards, and the inexperience of Tim Anderson, and the lackadaisical attitude of Sam Adams led to an early season run of terrible play out of our tackles that threw our whole defense off. I think the injuries to Milloy and Vincent and Mcgee really !@#$ed with our ability to contain teams. I think we had a slew of bad luck and bad bounces and senseless needless penalties that often follow a team playing bad (notice how the ball bounced to Vincent when he was on his back for the first INT) and change wins into losses. I think Moulds was just playing along and not giving 100% but that suspension lit a fire under his ass, but we saw what this team could do with a healthy Parrish, using Evans and Moulds as they should be used and a decent Josh Reed. Again, this is a 5-10 team because that is how they played and that is in the books. With a few very minor changes, or decisions, this exact same team could have been and likely should have been 9-6 right now.
Buftex Posted December 27, 2005 Author Posted December 27, 2005 I think fans are way too quick to just make knee-jerk decisions about everything and while some people (stupidly, IMO) say i know all I need to know after two games of Losman or six games of Holcomb or 10 games of the team, a person that actually has the job of running the team might want to actually let the season play out until it is over, evaluate what happened, talk to a few friends in the know, speak with his GM and coach to get their side of the story, and then make a decision based on all of the factors. 542860[/snapback] I agree, but I am sure, by the end of that San Diego Chargers debacle, Ralph must have started giving some thought toward next season. It would be unrealistic, IMO, for him not to start thinking about the next season. After that game it was painfully obvious that this team wasn't going to make any sort of miracle run like last year...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 I agree, but I am sure, by the end of that San Diego Chargers debacle, Ralph must have started giving some thought toward next season. It would be unrealistic, IMO, for him not to start thinking about the next season. After that game it was painfully obvious that this team wasn't going to make any sort of miracle run like last year... 542863[/snapback] I'm sure he was. I would imagine he's changed his mind six times already. But thinking about it, and leaning one way, or considering a major overhaul, are far different things than already making up your mind to fire someone and looking for available candidates, although that should be one of the first things done. I don't think it's wise to fire either of them unless you have a good candidate to replace them.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 jeez one win over the bengals (our 1st road win of the season)and people wanna keep td and mike!god i hope ralph is smarter than that.
Mark VI Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 I think fans are way too quick to just make knee-jerk decisions about everything and while some people (stupidly, IMO) say i know all I need to know after two games of Losman or six games of Holcomb or 10 games of the team, a person that actually has the job of running the team might want to actually let the season play out until it is over, evaluate what happened, talk to a few friends in the know, speak with his GM and coach to get their side of the story, and then make a decision based on all of the factors. Sunday didn't change the fact that this team is 5-10. We have sucked. We have been terribly coached. Our players let us down and their coach down repeatedly. Our GM didnt stock the team with the right group of winners and players at all the positions. But Sunday, to me, showed me what we should have been seeing all along. My read on it is that it just shows how little difference there is in the talent level of the teams in the league. I do not believe this was an on any given sunday type deal. This is the way the team should have been playing all along. I think that Mularkey himself flat blew a couple games with bad play-calling. I think the players just sucked a couple games, or choked a few times they should have made the play that changed the outcome of 3-4 games this year. I think the loss of Fat Pat, the inability of Ron Edwards, and the inexperience of Tim Anderson, and the lackadaisical attitude of Sam Adams led to an early season run of terrible play out of our tackles that threw our whole defense off. I think the injuries to Milloy and Vincent and Mcgee really !@#$ed with our ability to contain teams. I think we had a slew of bad luck and bad bounces and senseless needless penalties that often follow a team playing bad (notice how the ball bounced to Vincent when he was on his back for the first INT) and change wins into losses. I think Moulds was just playing along and not giving 100% but that suspension lit a fire under his ass, but we saw what this team could do with a healthy Parrish, using Evans and Moulds as they should be used and a decent Josh Reed. Again, this is a 5-10 team because that is how they played and that is in the books. With a few very minor changes, or decisions, this exact same team could have been and likely should have been 9-6 right now. 542860[/snapback] Bah ! What do you know ! Your points are rock solid. I only differ with the one statement above. Mularkey was lost in more than a couple games this year and failed to adjust as the games wore on. Our 2nd half scoring was dead last for a reason beyond a bad OL and other player shortcomings. Still, the posters who say " blow it up " make me laugh. I'm hoping "it" means the mush between their own ears. Go nuts in March FA and the draft with OL additions. Throw in a couple DL additions and maybe we have something to work with. Let Gray leave and find a new D philosophy. Let Wyche call the plays. I still see TD being thrown to the wolves. No way can the Bills escape the wrath of the ticket buying public without the most obvious change.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 Bah ! What do you know ! Your points are rock solid. I only differ with the one statement above. Mularkey was lost in more than a couple games this year and failed to adjust as the games wore on. Our 2nd half scoring was dead last for a reason beyond a bad OL and other player shortcomings. Still, the posters who say " blow it up " make me laugh. I'm hoping "it" means the mush between their own ears. Go nuts in March FA and the draft with OL additions. Throw in a couple DL additions and maybe we have something to work with. Let Gray leave and find a new D philosophy. Let Wyche call the plays. I still see TD being thrown to the wolves. No way can the Bills escape the wrath of the ticket buying public without the most obvious change. 542868[/snapback] He was lost in several games this year I agree. But I think simple, obvious, specific play-calling in 2-3 games could have been wins instead of losses. I am not sure his just bad play-calling could have gotten us more wins than 2-3. And how do we account for the fact we were one of if not the best third quarter team in the league last year? I don't think we gave up one TD in the third quarter the entire year, and only gave up about four field goals. Some ridiculous stat like that. And these were the same coaches.
Rico Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 Go nuts in March FA and the draft with OL additions. Throw in a couple DL additions and maybe we have something to work with542868[/snapback] TD is more than capable of doing that (this year notwithstanding). Let Gray leave and find a new D philosophy. Let Wyche call the plays. 542868[/snapback] But that still leaves MM in charge. More punts from inside the opponent's 40. More mismanagement of key players. Etc, etc. No way can the Bills escape the wrath of the ticket buying public without the most obvious change. 542868[/snapback] Agreed. And since MM is far & away the least competent of the two, he's the one that should be gone.
Mark VI Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 TD is more than capable of doing that (this year notwithstanding). 542875[/snapback] He was capable of upgrading the Lines that for the last few years and took a pass. He knew better. I would like to see a new coach myself but I just think Ralph will slash TD and tell Modrak to find linemen. Hope I'm wrong but the easy way out seems all too obvious.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 He was capable of upgrading the Lines that for the last few years and took a pass. He knew better. I would like to see a new coach myself but I just think Ralph will slash TD and tell Modrak to find linemen. Hope I'm wrong but the easy way out seems all too obvious. 542880[/snapback] TD is really not dumb. He may deserve to be fired for lack of production but he is not stupid. He is not completely blind to the importance of the offensive and defensive lines. Sometimes things don't work out and you're left short, and your decisions bite you in the ass. But TD, like most other GMs, bases his decisions on both individual and collective concerns. He knew we needed linemen. He saw who was out there in free agency and he negotiated with some and he made decisions for or against signing a guy, like, say, DeMulling, against how much he and the coaches thought he was worth. Other teams often come up and spoil your plans. Sometimes you don't pull the trigger fast enough. Sometimes teams take a college lineman you targeted one or two picks before your turn comes up. Sometimes you think you have a player coming and he signs with someone else. Sometimes your assistant coach says I like what I have in a player (Ron Edwards anyone?) if we cannot get someone else that turns out not to be true. And then you are left with Justin Bannan and Bennie Anderson trying to save your season. TD chose Roscoe Parrish because the guys available when our pick came up were not worth the money, or he and his scouts didnt think they were going to be good pros, and NOT because he thought we needed a skinny #3 WR more than a fat #2 DT. He simply made some decisions that turned out to be wrong. Mike Williams didn't show up. Tim Anderson didnt develop fast enough. Teague and Villarial got hurt. Bennie Anderson showed his lesser side more than his positive side. His own coaches didnt put the players he got into the best position to excel. A lot of things happened in concert that led to the terrible downfall. TD needs to be accountable for a lot of it. But it's just stupid for fans to think that he doesn't know how important a good line is.
Rico Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 He was capable of upgrading the Lines that for the last few years and took a pass. He knew better. I would like to see a new coach myself but I just think Ralph will slash TD and tell Modrak to find linemen. Hope I'm wrong but the easy way out seems all too obvious. 542880[/snapback] TD's had some bad luck though, too... partixcularly on the OL. Granted, the left side was questionable at best, but the right side looked rock solid after last year. Then Chris V got hurt & old & MW... Dumping TD & keeping MM just doesn't make sense to me at all. Though, like you said in another thread, it may make "Ralph sense"... God knows he's made some head-scratching moves over the years.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 I can see that one scenario that was mentioned where TD does contracts, Modrak becomes GM, and Mularkey stays, with a new OC and some MAJOR upgrading on both lines.
Buftex Posted December 27, 2005 Author Posted December 27, 2005 I'm sure he was. I would imagine he's changed his mind six times already. But thinking about it, and leaning one way, or considering a major overhaul, are far different things than already making up your mind to fire someone and looking for available candidates, although that should be one of the first things done. I don't think it's wise to fire either of them unless you have a good candidate to replace them. 542865[/snapback] Well, that was my point. There have already been rumours of Herm Edwards going to KC, Gregg Williams seems to have the inside track on the St Louis job, Wade Phillips in Houston, etc etc...nothing on the Bills, except the Modrak rumour. I think Allen Wilson was the first to break that story. He is around the Bills, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone leaked it to him. It seems that the Buffalo media guys rarely come up with a scoop, however. I still have my doubtst that Modrak, given his past GM possibilties, will take the job... Personally, I would have no objection to both TD and MM getting fired, but if one stays, I want the other to stay. Give them one final chance to see if they can put together a good team on the field. As dire as things look at times, there are glimmers of a decent team from time to time. I don't have as big a problem with what TD has done, with what Mularkey has done (or not done?) this year. The only thing that makes me a little uneasy about cutting Mularkey already, is that I was very impressed with the job he did in his first season. I really thought, going in to this season, we had an excellent coaching staff. Now, I have my doubts...
colin Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 the fact that they started jp when he wasn't ready, jerked around and benched him and then put him back in, then kept jp in after KC THEN PUT IN KELLY AGAIN(!!) to me shows bad bad coaching. i don't think these guys know what they are doing, TD has made some not so great moves in player personel and just horrible horrible moves in coaching. the only guy who has schit the bed worse than TD over the past 5 years is millen in detroit. td needs to go and so does mm
Johnny Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 the fact that they started jp when he wasn't ready, jerked around and benched him and then put him back in, then kept jp in after KC THEN PUT IN KELLY AGAIN(!!) to me shows bad bad coaching. 542902[/snapback] hard to disagree with that
Kelly the Dog Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 hard to disagree with that 542906[/snapback] It's easy to disagree with that. They made three total decisions. One was based on JP and the team sucking. It might not have been what I would have done, but it was hardly a no brainer, and most fans agreed with it. The next two were indeed no brainers and they had no other choice because first Holcomb got hurt and couldnt play, and then JP got hurt and couldn't play.
Johnny Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 It's easy to disagree with that. They made three total decisions. One was based on JP and the team sucking. It might not have been what I would have done, but it was hardly a no brainer, and most fans agreed with it. The next two were indeed no brainers and they had no other choice because first Holcomb got hurt and couldnt play, and then JP got hurt and couldn't play. 542913[/snapback] agree all you want but merry go round qb's dont seem to work at this level.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 agree all you want but merry go round qb's dont seem to work at this level. 542916[/snapback] I dont think they handled it perfectly. I would have started JP the whole year to get him the experience. The point is, they didnt have any choice whatsoever in 2 of their 3 decisions on changing quarterbacks.
Johnny Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 I dont think they handled it perfectly. I would have started JP the whole year to get him the experience. The point is, they didnt have any choice whatsoever in 2 of their 3 decisions on changing quarterbacks. 542918[/snapback] that's the definition of bad coaching and preparation seems to me Losman was named the starter when Bledsoe was let go.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 27, 2005 Posted December 27, 2005 that's the definition of bad coaching and preparation seems to me Losman was named the starter when Bledsoe was let go. 542919[/snapback] He was. They made the right decision starting Losman. They named Losman the starter before they even signed Holcomb. They brought Holcomb in to be the back-up. One of the best back-ups in the league. They paid him a back-ups salary. He said he was fine being the back-up. If they made it an open competion there is zero question that Holcomb would have won the job, he had nine years of experience and JP had zero. But they made the decision, the right decision, to groom Losman as the starter of the future. Their mistake, IMO, was to bench him originally. Kelly Holcomb is not a long term starter for the Bills, not a franchise player, and I'm not even sure if he's good enough to take a team to the playoffs, particularly with a suspect line. Losman we don't know if he is the guy, but he may very well be a long term starter, may be a franchise player, may be able to take the team to the playoffs. What he needs is playing time.
Recommended Posts