BuffaloWings Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 It just seemed like Donahoe was trying to make a splash by hiring a coach that nobody expected him to hire. GW came out of nowhere when Lewis & Fox were available (even though Lewis didn't seem to want the job) and Mularkey came from (sort of) out of nowhere when Weis, Crennel, Smith, and many other good ones were available. Nice job, Tom. Nice job.
Simon Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 i dont know how we ended up with Mularkey over Crennel, Weis, and Lovie Smith. I imagine Lovie's preference was to stay in the NFC, a weaker conference where he was more familiar with opposing personell and coaches. And I don't think Weis or Crennel were very much interested in taking a job in Coach Bill's division. Being smart fellas they probably would have wanted as far away from Belichik as they could possibly get. And fwiw, I think that if we had hired Smith or Crennel, most of y'all would be currently trying to run them out of town as well.
dave mcbride Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 And fwiw, I think that if we had hired Smith or Crennel, most of y'all would be currently trying to run them out of town as well. 562698[/snapback] bingo!
JAMIEBUF12 Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 I dont know how we ended up with Gregg Williams over Fox amd Marvin Lewis and i dont know how we ended up with Mularkey over Crennel, Weis, and Lovie Smith. I mean, Its ok if Donahoe didnt even interview these guys, but he did. Its almost funny, but it hurts when i laugh. 562575[/snapback] well wasn't toms mo the fact that he didn't want a strong minded head coach after his dealings with bill cower? if he had gotten a weiss or crennel or a lovie smith they would have been very determined to change things.when tom hired mularky he didnt even let mike really choose his own staff.mike took the job knowing that gray was gonna stay and he would not make any bones about it
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 bingo! 562784[/snapback] Why do you say that? There's no way to know how good or bad this team could have been with one of those two guys. Don't even TRY to tell me Mularkey's in their league. he isn't.
turftoe Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Without a doubt, Donahoe's biggest fault was his inability to pick the right coach.
BuckeyeBill Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Without a doubt, Donahoe's biggest fault was his inability to pick the right coach. 562866[/snapback] I couldn't agree more. Haven't we been down this road before on similar threads?
2003Contenders Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 OK... I'm about to go all over the map here in terms of both praise and criticism of MM, which probably reveals my own ambivalence toward him. Not to defend TD but... 1. Maybe just maybe Ralph placed a financial restriction on how much he was willing to pay his HC, which may have disqualified some candidates (Weis?) right off the bat. 2. With a top drawer defense already, I believe TD was looking for a HC that could come in and clean up the offense as quickly as possible to make us immediate contenders. MM already had a history of coming in and cleaning up a mess left by Gilbride in Pittsburgh. The thought was that he could do the same in Buffalo. 3. How do we know that the result would be any different with one of the other HCs? Weiss has done great in college -- but so had Steve Spurrier. Let's see a show of hands as to how many people were calling for Lovie Smith over MM at this time LAST year? I think Smith is a fine coach, but whose to say that the Bears aren't a bit of a fluke this year -- just like a couple of years back, when they went 13-3. And as for Romeo, well, just how good were the Browns this year? I'm not saying that MM is the greatest thing in the world. However, I really liked the job he did in 2004 -- but was obviously less than enthusuastic about what he did in 2005. That means to me that the verdict is still out on him. There were a lot of things that went wrong in 2005 -- some were his fault and some were not. I have NEVER understood, for example, why he got any bit of the blame for what happened with Moulds. In fact, it wasn't even him that made any part of it public. And, as for Sam Adams, well, ol' Sam has worn out his welcome everywhere he's ever played. In some ways, I have to say that MM showed me some thick skin by sticking with these guys in the final weeks. Of course, I have to agree with many out there who have questioned his play calling, especially in the redzone. Also, he's not shown that he can adapt well during the course of a game. The last two coaches that were "fired" -- I discount GW because his contract simply wasn't renewed -- were placed in that situation when they refused to follow Ralph's mandate and fire one or more of their assistants. Levy, in fact, resigned -- and Ralph tried to claim that in being "insubordinate", Wade had in essence resigned as well. With all of the coaches that we just saw canned, you really have to wonder whether Ralph made this order, hoping that MM would himself resign. Then there is the opposite perspective. Perhaps TD was such a control freak that he forced a number of these assistants upon MM -- and maybe for the first time Levy has given MM some freedom to name his own staff. Considering that most of the staff that was let go was on the defense, this could be the case. As for Tom Clements, we knew that he was a goner regardless. The only probelm with this theory is that if this were the case, I would have expected some replacements to have been named by now. Of course, maybe the team is waiting to see if Gray gets a HC job prior to firing him, so that Ralph doesn't have to eat any of that money too. That being the case, maybe MM will act quickly in naming a new DC, who will then have the option of naming their own defensive assitants? Hmmm...
obie_wan Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 It would be easier for me to live with Mularkey right now if he didn’t have so many disputes with the vets this year. This franchise really needs Moulds to be in a renegotiating mood for next year, and Adams must stick around with our current tandem of Bannon and Anderson at DT. I'm not saying these guy's are angels by any means but as some of the leaders of this team I worry if they aren't buying it the younger guys won't either. 562578[/snapback] If Marv is committing to Mullarkey- then it may be a must to clean out the problem children to avoid a contaminated locker room. The front office needs to send a clear message as to who's in charge and mutiny won't be tolerated. Failure to fully support Mullarkey is just setting him up to fail.
X. Benedict Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Both Moulds and Adams publicly came out after the season and said they want to come back here and play for the Bills and have no problem with Mularkey. 562686[/snapback] Together they have about 10.5 million reasons why.
Sound_n_Fury Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Without a doubt, Donahoe's biggest fault was his inability to pick the right coach. 562866[/snapback] Why do you assume it was TDs decision? Maybe the high profile cocahing candidates didn't want to work with TD, given his rep with Cowher.
.thumb.png.1b7fb4086290c3afc001a7900b31fab0.png)
Recommended Posts