SDS Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 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. 554540[/snapback] Geez Dave, it is awfully funny how the other team with the superior coach always managed to win that game. Didn't matter if they inferior or superior players... Yet, Marv Levy's legend lives on in your mind. I'm sure the Giants savior THEIR victory with an inferior team... too bad we have to listen to excuses for why our "Hall of Fame" coach, with no legacy whatsoever, who was run out of town (that happens to ALL the Hall of Fame coaches right?) couldn't get it done.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Might as well at my issue with Marv. He's going to get them to perform by promising when they get to the SB, they will be able to party all they want that week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 i disagree. as fickle as Bills fans are, as evidenced by many posts on TSW, if the Bills were to suffer thru a couple more losing seasons the mob will sharpen their pitchforks and light their torches and come after Marv 554441[/snapback] Why is it nobody remembers that we already ran Marv off once? The pitchforks were front and center after the 1997 season when the team basically quit on him. Wade Phillips came in in 1998 and was actually an IMPROVEMENT. Marv was a good coach, but couldn't put together a staff and was not a real X and O's guy himself and got handled by the better, more gameplan involved coaches of his time, like Gibbs and Parcells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan III Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Through the 45 years of the Bills' existence, IMO, nobody has able to reach RW like Marv did. 554548[/snapback] Marv couldn't reach RW when it came to keeping Polian, Wolford and Ballard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Marv couldn't reach RW when it came to keeping Polian, Wolford and Ballard... 554569[/snapback] And RW has learned from that! (I hope). He was still the best at it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Why is it nobody remembers that we already ran Marv off once? The pitchforks were front and center after the 1997 season when the team basically quit on him. Wade Phillips came in in 1998 and was actually an IMPROVEMENT. Marv was a good coach, but couldn't put together a staff and was not a real X and O's guy himself and got handled by the better, more gameplan involved coaches of his time, like Gibbs and Parcells. 554567[/snapback] While certainly more polite than my posts, this is exactly what I have been trying to say ever since Marv was thrust upon us once more. Everyone wants to use the 4 super bowls as their proof, but they ignore the other pieces of evidence. Like the fact that he was outcoached every game, regardless who had the better talent. Like the fact that no one gave a rats ass about his assistants (which is INCONCEIVABLE to me that a team can go 4 straight times and not get cherry-picked). Like the fact that he was run out of town a few short years after our last SB. And lastly, like the fact that after he was ousted - NO ONE GAVE A sh-- ABOUT HIM. Can someone name me another "Hall of Fame" coach that NO ONE WANTED WHEN HE WAS AVAILABLE???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Geez Dave, it is awfully funny how the other team with the superior coach always managed to win that game. Didn't matter if they inferior or superior players... Yet, Marv Levy's legend lives on in your mind. I'm sure the Giants savior THEIR victory with an inferior team... too bad we have to listen to excuses for why our "Hall of Fame" coach, with no legacy whatsoever, who was run out of town (that happens to ALL the Hall of Fame coaches right?) couldn't get it done.... 554561[/snapback] marv levy's legend? do you even read my posts? man you've got an animus towards the guy. anyway, i'm talking about corey, for one thing, who by the way i never said was great. and i'm on record here many times over the years here as saying that the 1991 super bowl was the only one ever in which the less talented team one. i had to add the pats victory in 2001, but still, it's been only 2 times. as for the other bills super bowls, the bills had far less talent. i mean come on - it's obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 marv levy's legend? do you even read my posts? man you've got an animus towards the guy. anyway, i'm talking about corey, for one thing, who by the way i never said was great. and i'm on record here many times over the years here as saying that the 1991 super bowl was the only one ever in which the less talented team one. i had to add the pats victory in 2001, but still, it's been only 2 times. as for the other bills super bowls, the bills had far less talent. i mean come on - it's obvious. 554593[/snapback] I know, it's poor ol' Marv's dumb luck that he beat the odds... I guess THAT should be his "legacy"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Why is it nobody remembers that we already ran Marv off once? The pitchforks were front and center after the 1997 season when the team basically quit on him. Wade Phillips came in in 1998 and was actually an IMPROVEMENT. Marv was a good coach, but couldn't put together a staff and was not a real X and O's guy himself and got handled by the better, more gameplan involved coaches of his time, like Gibbs and Parcells. 554567[/snapback] True. But, the game ebbs and flows through the years... The work-alcoholic coaches will prove just that... Work-alcoholics. Look at MM, all the time they spend gaming planning. It shows on the opening drive. Isn't Buffalo still second in the league behind Indy in scoring TD's on the opening drive of games? Or close to it... Where things get FUBARed is after that. Adjustments, adjustments, adjustments. Never really have been Marv's strong point with the execution type philosphy he pushed though. That is where, IMO, the Bills will run into the roadblock with MM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 In fact, I see little chance for him to succeed and more than likely he will tarnish his reputation to much larger audience who have bestowed sainthood upon him (forgetting that we actually ran him out of town too). 554449[/snapback] I've been wondering when someone would remind us all of that. JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I've been wondering when someone would remind us all of that. JDG 554634[/snapback] and when I say "succeed" I mean succeed to the level of this demanding fan base. That, IMHO, is a division title and a STRONG playoff showing. The chances of that in a small window are remote IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted January 5, 2006 Share 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] Isn't it fairly apparent that Ralph Wilson said that because Mularkey hadn't fired his asisstants yet as Ralph had demanded of him? JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 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. 554528[/snapback] I've loved Marv too, hated the way he was run out of town by a fickle fan base, and absolutely agree that his attempts the last few years to get back into coaching have been unseemly. I'd much rather leave his legacy as his legacy..... JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I liken this more to having just flipped over an omelet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I've loved Marv too, hated the way he was run out of town by a fickle fan base, and absolutely agree that his attempts the last few years to get back into coaching have been unseemly. I'd much rather leave his legacy as his legacy..... JDG 554645[/snapback] you say "fickle", but believe you me - he is ORDERS of magnitudes more popular today than he was as a coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 you say "fickle", but believe you me - he is ORDERS of magnitudes more popular today than he was as a coach. 554654[/snapback] Being horrible for 6 years tends to make people romanticize the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 and when I say "succeed" I mean succeed to the level of this demanding fan base. That, IMHO, is a division title and a STRONG playoff showing. The chances of that in a small window are remote IMO. 554636[/snapback] That's an interesting question. I personally think that the city of Buffalo is so winning-starved right now that they'd be ready to tear down the goal posts for a division title again just like 1988. (And if it happens, it wouldn't be surprising to see us drop a home game to an inferior 4-win team the next week admist all the euphoria like a certain other team we saw this season.) But that would simply be good for the first year. Eventually "Shanahan Disease" will sit in - the disease whereby the fanbase and the media start making inane comments like "He hasn't won a Super Bowl in 5 years", "He hasn't won a playoff game since John Elway retired," or my favorite "He's gotten to the playoffs the last umpteen years, but has lost in the 1st round." We're seeing a mass outbreak of "Shanahan Disease" in New York City right now where the fan base is playing a key role in running off Herman Edwards who has only brought the city Division Titles, Playoff Berths, and 1st Round Playoff Wins in just about every year his starting QB remains healthy.... in the same division as the Patriots I might add. And yeah, it will take a remarkable turnaround for this team to even make the playoffs next year, and I have a hard time seeing a playoff win within two years. As much as I disagree with Mortensen's defense of Tom Donahoe, I think he did peg one thing exactly right. This fan base brought out the pitchforks for not making the playoffs this year, and the same fan base also wonders why we don't trot an incompetent JP Losman out there every game for "development", and wonders why we lose games with Losman in at QB. JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 you say "fickle", but believe you me - he is ORDERS of magnitudes more popular today than he was as a coach. 554654[/snapback] Oh I agree. Maybe not a full order of magnitude more than in 1994 (after the comeback game), but certainly orders of magnitude more than 1997. Heck I remember some regular poster here using the pseudonymn "Marv Liverspot" to basically bash Marv at every opportunity..... and some guy using the name "Geriatric Park" to contribute to the mess..... JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted January 5, 2006 Share 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] Great Post. I, for one, at least believe that Marv Levy told Ralph Wilson that he wanted to keep Mularkey. But let's face it, Mularkey is nominally working for a guy who didn't hire him; and has kept his job by firing his asisstants on the orders of the owner. Meanwhile, Modrak is wandering around like the ghost of Donahoe-past with who knows what authority. Heaven knows who makes the call in the draft room? Marv? Modrak? Mularkey? Successful NFL organizations are built on a partnership between the GM and the HC. The HC is the GM's guy, and the GM is the HC's guy. They share a common philosophy and a common plan for building the team. This reorganization has none of those Hallmarks. Instead, it has the looks of a "fantasy squad" - lots of bits and pieces cobbled together, but no semblance of a team here at all. JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Successful NFL organizations are built on a partnership between the GM and the HC. The HC is the GM's guy, and the GM is the HC's guy. They share a common philosophy and a common plan for building the team. This reorganization has none of those Hallmarks. Instead, it has the looks of a "fantasy squad" - lots of bits and pieces cobbled together, but no semblance of a team here at all. JDG 554674[/snapback] Of course the irony is that MM & GW were both supposed to have been TD's guys, but it's not overly apparent that the GM was on the same page as his coaches, and is the likely reason he just earned a one way ticket out of town. It has been reported that TD didn't exactly listen to the head coach's input in the draft & FA selections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts