Kelly the Dog Posted January 5, 2006 Author Posted January 5, 2006 again, how you can possibly say this without knowing the least thing about how the structure will actually work? this is really just wild guesswork. 554474[/snapback] Everything about today is based on guesswork. But it seems pretty obvious he does not have a lot of power. First, Ralph says I am going to be more active and takes back the President's post. Second, Modrak is given more responsibility and will spend more time in Buffalo, presumably running the draft and some personel decisions. Third, the coach is retained by the owner before the GM is hired and announced. When is the last time you saw that happen (with a coach on shaky ground I mean). Add in all of the speculation of that he may not get the GM title or will be named Head of Football Operations or other such made up jobs, and frankly, I don't think Marv has a lot of power. I am not saying he would automatically fail if he was given it. I am saying that he wasn't given the power, and four guys dividing up power in a professional football team is a recipe for disaster for a team reeling in disarray.
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 Marv is very headstrong. Walt Corey? Not playing rookies no matter how much better than the veterans ahead of them based on principal? Marv puts on a great public face as the witty jovial professor but he is a tough, stubborn, sailor-mouthed, extremely confident, loyal to a fault, opinionated bastard. And most of that is good when you're a head coach. 554473[/snapback] not playing rookies? thurman had more than double the number of yards than the second leading carrier in his rookie season. cornelius bennett set the league on fire in his rookie season (he joined the bills late), and shane conlan played a ton as a rookie too.
Gavin in Va Beach Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 i'm not saying corey was great, but my god, the retrospective trashing of the assistants is just ridiculously wrong. the problem with the bills defense had a great deal to do with the lack of good defensive tackles than walt corey's strategic acumen. 554479[/snapback] The secondary was very suspect as well. While they were pretty decent at getting INT's, it seemed like opposing teams could convert 3rd and long at will.
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 Everything about today is based on guesswork. But it seems pretty obvious he does not have a lot of power. First, Ralph says I am going to be more active and takes back the President's post. Second, Modrak is given more responsibility and will spend more time in Buffalo, presumably running the draft and some personel decisions. Third, the coach is retained by the owner before the GM is hired and announced. When is the last time you saw that happen (with a coach on shaky ground I mean). Add in all of the speculation of that he may not get the GM title or will be named Head of Football Operations or other such made up jobs, and frankly, I don't think Marv has a lot of power. I am not saying he would automatically fail if he was given it. I am saying that he wasn't given the power, and four guys dividing up power in a professional football team is a recipe for disaster for a team reeling in disarray. 554491[/snapback] what makes you think the coach is on shaky ground? based on what evidence? it sounds to me like he's going to get a fresh start and that both modrak and marv like him. by the way, the structure you describe above -- not that i have any idea as to whether it will happen -- is pretty much the same structure that the seahawks have now.
Rico Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 Everything about today is based on guesswork. But it seems pretty obvious he does not have a lot of power. First, Ralph says I am going to be more active and takes back the President's post. Second, Modrak is given more responsibility and will spend more time in Buffalo, presumably running the draft and some personel decisions. Third, the coach is retained by the owner before the GM is hired and announced. When is the last time you saw that happen (with a coach on shaky ground I mean). Add in all of the speculation of that he may not get the GM title or will be named Head of Football Operations or other such made up jobs, and frankly, I don't think Marv has a lot of power. I am not saying he would automatically fail if he was given it. I am saying that he wasn't given the power, and four guys dividing up power in a professional football team is a recipe for disaster for a team reeling in disarray. 554491[/snapback] Like you said, it's all guesswork. But I'll bet he's got a lot more power than either lame-duck MM or lame-duck Modrak.Time will tell.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 5, 2006 Author Posted January 5, 2006 walt corey? you mean the guy whose defense improved greatly between 1991 and 1992 and whose defense came close to setting a league record for turnovers in 1993? the guy who marv fired without a problem after the 1994 season? i'm not saying corey was great, but my god, the retrospective trashing of the assistants is just ridiculously wrong. the problem with the bills defense had a great deal to do with the lack of good defensive tackles than walt corey's strategic acumen. 554479[/snapback] I think you're nuts. Walt Corey was given arguably the best defensive end and pass rusher in history. A terror. Two Hall of Fame quality linebackers in Bennett and Talley. A tremendous end in Hansen. Tough veteran linemen and defensive backs and a roster full of solid role players. And molded them into a mediocre defense that was very often brutalized in its biggest games. I read some report about the Cowboys players laughing when they were watching film of the bills and knew they were going to walk all over us. Corey was a terrible coordinator and everyone was screaming for his head but stubborn Marv wouldn't let him go. As soon as Wade was brought in the defense immediately was noticeably better IMO. And I think we would have won 2-3 Super Bowls if Wade was there and not Corey. But Corey was Marv's buddy.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 5, 2006 Author Posted January 5, 2006 what makes you think the coach is on shaky ground? based on what evidence? it sounds to me like he's going to get a fresh start and that both modrak and marv like him. by the way, the structure you describe above -- not that i have any idea as to whether it will happen -- is pretty much the same structure that the seahawks have now. 554503[/snapback] Umm.. he's on shaky ground because the owner wouldn't say he was the coach during the owner's press conference? But rather said we're talking about it? Because the coach is coming off an abysmal year that his playoff expected team finished 5-11 amidst a whirlwind of turmoil? I would say that the coach is on shaky ground, yes.
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 I think you're nuts. Walt Corey was given arguably the best defensive end and pass rusher in history. A terror. Two Hall of Fame quality linebackers in Bennett and Talley. A tremendous end in Hansen. Tough veteran linemen and defensive backs and a roster full of solid role players. And molded them into a mediocre defense that was very often brutalized in its biggest games. I read some report about the Cowboys players laughing when they were watching film of the bills and knew they were going to walk all over us. Corey was a terrible coordinator and everyone was screaming for his head but stubborn Marv wouldn't let him go. As soon as Wade was brought in the defense immediately was noticeably better IMO. And I think we would have won 2-3 Super Bowls if Wade was there and not Corey. But Corey was Marv's buddy. 554507[/snapback] dog, look at the numbers. also think about jeff wright. and our always-lame second cornerback after odomes. i remember the pats-era parcells saying one time something to the effect of "instituting the mickey washington plan" on offense (it worked, of course). as for the super bowls. in the giants game, corey didn't miss those tackles, and his guys were in the right position to make plays. the redskins were a flat out better team and bruce was not 100%. the cowboys offensive line dominated us the first game, and aikman was unstoppable. and the offense turned the ball over 9 freaking times! in the second cowboys super bowl, the bills d played great until the second half, when johnson instituted the phil hansen plan, in which he ran emmitt smith at him (behind erik williams) 10 out of 11 plays.
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 Umm.. he's on shaky ground because the owner wouldn't say he was the coach during the owner's press conference? But rather said we're talking about it? Because the coach is coming off an abysmal year that his playoff expected team finished 5-11 amidst a whirlwind of turmoil? I would say that the coach is on shaky ground, yes. 554513[/snapback] don't you think he may have said that because there was a chance marv might bail? also, it was a ridiculous press conference. he was clearly off and unclear in answering questions. i wouldn't read too much into it.
obie_wan Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 Nice post. You've nearly sold me on bringing Marv back. Still, I fear this has train wreck written all over it. Not that it would be much different from recent years though... 554442[/snapback] If you thought Teflon was micro-managing MM's on field decisions, how soon before Marv gets the itch to give some help on the field?
MDH Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 He is so smart and so capable he can fill several roles. If you need him to be the visionary he can do that. If you need him to be the worker bee/motivator, he can do that. If you need him to be the hard ass, he can be that. If you need him to sell the franchise to a coordinator or free agent--he can do that. Just my 2 cents--probably worth about that much... 554438[/snapback] What if we need him to put in 15 hour days the entire year? Can an 80-year old do that?
Kelly the Dog Posted January 5, 2006 Author Posted January 5, 2006 dog, look at the numbers. also think about jeff wright. and our always-lame second cornerback after odomes. i remember the pats-era parcells saying one time something to the effect of "instituting the mickey washington plan" on offense (it worked, of course). as for the super bowls. in the giants game, corey didn't miss those tackles, and his guys were in the right position to make plays. the redskins were a flat out better team and bruce was not 100%. the cowboys offensive dominated us the first game, and the offense turned the ball over 9 freaking times. in the second cowboys super bowl, the bills d played great until the second half, when johnson instituted the phil hansen plan, in which he ran emmitt smith at him (behind erik williams) 10 out of 11 plays. 554516[/snapback] The Giants were a clearly inferior team that kept the ball the entire game and clearly outcoached and outplayed us when they shouldn't have. The Redskins were a better team but just ran up and down the field on us at will and could have scored 50 points. The Cowboys dominated us the entire third game and nearly did score 50. And the Cowboys dominated us half of the other game. So sure, for one out of eight halves, Walt Corey's star-studded defense was stellar.
Rico Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 the phil hansen plan, in which he ran emmitt smith at him (behind erik williams) 10 out of 11 plays. 554516[/snapback] I think that was more the Erik Williams plan... he dominated everyone back then except Reggie White (more than held his own though)
Scraps Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 No one knows what will happen but to me this series of moves stinks, for several reasons. The biggest of which is that the biggest problem with the Bills, besides their lines, is no team identity and no team direction. Right now, although the numbers may fluctuate on an hourly basis, you're going to have four disparate headstrong guys all having 25% of the power and input. Ralph, Marv, Modrak, Mularkey, and maybe five depending on who actually will now negotiate contracts and be responsible for the cap, like Overdorf or whatever his name is. There is nobody really in charge. There is no vision. There is no leadership. There is no one the team can get behind and say we're going to war for this guy. Modrak and Mularkey are lame ducks. The only way this will work, IMO, is if Ralph really put Marv as GM only in title, with Modrak in charge of the draft and the player personel, working with Marv. Marv is the public face of the team and handles the press and fans and sweettalks free agents and is lovable Uncle Mo. But Modrak is making most of the football decisions behind the scenes and without the responsibility of being the marketing guy and public face and capologist, etc. That way, he could give Mularkey one chance to get the team on the right track. 554397[/snapback] I doubt Modrak will have the ability to buck Levy, Mularkey, or Wilson if for no other reason than he is staying in Florida. I have to seriously question how good a scouting/personel department can be when its leader is stationed 1100 miles away.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 5, 2006 Author Posted January 5, 2006 don't you think he may have said that because there was a chance marv might bail? also, it was a ridiculous press conference. he was clearly off and unclear in answering questions. i wouldn't read too much into it. 554517[/snapback] Just conjecture but I think Marv was on his hands and knees begging for a job, would have taken anything despite his public bragging of only looking for a head coaching job (how dd that work out) and he has been groveling for 4-5 years. He's actually been embarrassing himself over the last few years and believe me, I love the guy. This isn't bashing because I hate him.
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 I think that was more the Erik Williams plan... he dominated everyone back then except Reggie White (more than held his own though) 554523[/snapback] good point! although emmitt was pretty damn good himself. this is all bringing back memories of jeff wright wrapping up emmitt in the back field at about the 12 only to be swatted away like a mosquito. emmitt ran in, and the cowboys went up 20-13. in all fairness, the cowboys were a way more talented team than the bills in 92 and 93.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 5, 2006 Author Posted January 5, 2006 good point! although emmitt was pretty damn good himself. this is all bringing back memories of jeff wright wrapping up emmitt in the back field at about the 12 only to be swatted away like a mosquito. emmitt ran in, and the cowboys went up 20-13. in all fairness, the cowboys were a way more talented team than the bills in 92 and 93. 554532[/snapback] They were a better team, they were not a more talented team. I agree with you that the only game we should have won, when we were clearly the better team, was the Giants game. The Skins had a miracle year and the Cowboys were a better team. But I think they were simply a better coached team, and we had as many good and as many star players as they did, on both sides of the ball.
JoeF Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 What if we need him to put in 15 hour days the entire year? Can an 80-year old do that? 554519[/snapback] To be honest MDH--I don't think so. But he spoke at a company sales conference in September (he is acquaintances with a person I work with a lot)...his biggest concern was having time to run his 3 miles in San Fran before he got on the plane home to Chicago..his speaking schedule calls for a lot of travel and some pretty brutal days and he is no worse for the wear...but 9 months of 15 hour days is not going to happen... He joked about his hearing...which is bad---said its a good thing sometimes...
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 They were a better team, they were not a more talented team. I agree with you that the only game we should have won, when we were clearly the better team, was the Giants game. The Skins had a miracle year and the Cowboys were a better team. But I think they were simply a better coached team, and we had as many good and as many star players as they did, on both sides of the ball. 554534[/snapback] i think that kelly was not the same player after rupturing his bursar sac in his elbow about 2/3 of the way before the 92 season, and he was immobile in the playoffs that year. aikman was clearly better. the cowboys had better offensive and defensive lines, especially in 93 after wolford had left. they also had a far better secondary than the bills, a better tight end, and better receivers. the bills probably had better linebackers in 1992, but in 93 it was pretty much a wash -- the dallas lbs were so damn fast, and the bills were starting mark maddox and a slowing darryl talley.
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 5, 2006 Posted January 5, 2006 Marv was great with leadership when he was here. But he had a lot of power. He was the head coach. He has very little power here. That is the thesis of my post and main complaint. Everyone has a little bit of power here now. The successful teams it seems to me have one guy that is the undisputed leader, like Belichick or Parcells or Vermeil or Gruden in the recent past. Or at the very least, two guys like Polian and Dungy in Indy. Right now, everyone has a little power, and I don't really believe that Marv can be a leader with no real power. 554445[/snapback] Underneath it all I feel he wields a lot of power. On paper it looks like a 25% split. The problem has always been Ralph. With Marv having RW's ear... I think the owner can be placated. Through the 45 years of the Bills' existence, IMO, nobody has able to reach RW like Marv did. Give it a shot.
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts