Dr. K Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 This latest news about Mularkey resigning convinces me the situation with the Bills is out of control. I can understand him quitting, since he was basically being given a vote of no confidence, and being forced to fire all the assistants, yet still would be held responsible for the team's performance. The situation was designed for him to fail I suppose you could say this clears the decks and hope for better, but I tend to read it as leaving the scene in chaos. Marv is a rookie GM, the entire coaching staff will be new, and the direction fo the team is in complete flux. It's going back to less than squre one. Those of you who wanted the whole thing blown up, you go your wish. I predict people will be looking back on the good old days of Tom Donahoe within a year. Donohoe's decisions may not all have worked out, but he had a plan, and was rational, and he did not make hysterical changes based on the mood of the fans or the result of the last three games. I see no signs of steadiness in this organization, at any level. We are REALLY in Arizona Cardinals territory now.
The Dean Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 This latest news about Mularkey resigning convinces me the situation with the Bills is out of control. I can understand him quitting, since he was basically being given a vote of no confidence, and being forced to fire all the assistants, yet still would be held responsible for the team's performance. The situation was designed for him to fail I suppose you could say this clears the decks and hope for better, but I tend to read it as leaving the scene in chaos. Marv is a rookie GM, the entire coaching staff will be new, and the direction fo the team is in complete flux. It's going back to less than squre one. Those of you who wanted the whole thing blown up, you go your wish. I predict people will be looking back on the good old days of Tom Donahoe within a year. Donohoe's decisions may not all have worked out, but he had a plan, and was rational, and he did not make hysterical changes based on the mood of the fans or the result of the last three games. I see no signs of steadiness in this organization, at any level. We are REALLY in Arizona Cardinals territory now. 563971[/snapback] All is well. Move along, there's nothing to see here. Everything is fine...AOK...fine and dandy, yessiree. Oooooooommmmmmmmm Nam Yoho Renge Kyo
JDG Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 I predict people will be looking back on the good old days of Tom Donahoe within a year. Donohoe's decisions may not all have worked out, but he had a plan, and was rational, and he did not make hysterical changes based on the mood of the fans or the result of the last three games. I see no signs of steadiness in this organization, at any level. I'm not convinced that Donahoe had a long-term plan. He had a plan for each year, but then was willing to change it wildly. Hence he went from building the team around Bledsoe-Henry-Mouds-Reed and then ripping it all out in favor of Losman-McGahee-(Moulds)-Evans-Parrish in the span of just a couple years. He had a HC in the last year of his contract, and drafted a 1st-rounder who couldn't play in his first year. He had survived 4-straight non-playoff years and trotted JP Losman out as the starter for a year in which a playoff run was critical. The problem with Donahoe is that he was both really good (McGee, Moorman, Evans) and spectacularly bad (OLine, Bledsoe, 2nd Day Draft Picks.) It makes it hard to come up with a simple judgment of his tenure. JDG
Dr. K Posted January 13, 2006 Author Posted January 13, 2006 I'm not convinced that Donahoe had a long-term plan. He had a plan for each year, but then was willing to change it wildly. Hence he went from building the team around Bledsoe-Henry-Mouds-Reed and then ripping it all out in favor of Losman-McGahee-(Moulds)-Evans-Parrish in the span of just a couple years. He had a HC in the last year of his contract, and drafted a 1st-rounder who couldn't play in his first year. He had survived 4-straight non-playoff years and trotted JP Losman out as the starter for a year in which a playoff run was critical. The problem with Donahoe is that he was both really good (McGee, Moorman, Evans) and spectacularly bad (OLine, Bledsoe, 2nd Day Draft Picks.) It makes it hard to come up with a simple judgment of his tenure. JDG 564050[/snapback] Certainly he changed course at times, like on Bledsoe. But I still think he was a steadying influence. I don't know how the Bills get their house in order now. Certainly it makes me doubt they will do any better next season than this. I can see a complete collapse, a rebuilding, by necessity, from the ground up; not a fast turnaround. Get ready for confused quarterbacks, changed schemes, and a 3-13 season.
PatPatPatSack Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 Certainly he changed course at times, like on Bledsoe. But I still think he was a steadying influence. I don't know how the Bills get their house in order now. Certainly it makes me doubt they will do any better next season than this. I can see a complete collapse, a rebuilding, by necessity, from the ground up; not a fast turnaround. Get ready for confused quarterbacks, changed schemes, and a 3-13 season. 564190[/snapback] Theres plenty of time for coaching. Not sure if there is enough time to get enough players. IMHO coaching accounts for about 6% of your success. Maybe one win a year. Players otoh are what plays the game. Fact is, Malarky was in the end what Malarky always was. An indecisive "tuff guy", who never really could be a leader. If he had strength of character, he would've quit before he fired all those guys. But he dumped them and then thought, "ah too much trouble". Good riddance. The 6% he contributed was cr*p anyway. This move, unlike the others, has 0 impact on the Bills future. One way or the other.
Sound_n_Fury Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 IMHO coaching accounts for about 6% of your success. Maybe one win a year. 564356[/snapback] Ah, so Teddy Bruchi's the difference maker with the Pats....and here I thought BB played a big part in things. Huh.
AJ1 Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 Theres plenty of time for coaching. Not sure if there is enough time to get enough players. IMHO coaching accounts for about 6% of your success. Maybe one win a year. Players otoh are what plays the game. Fact is, Malarky was in the end what Malarky always was. An indecisive "tuff guy", who never really could be a leader. If he had strength of character, he would've quit before he fired all those guys. But he dumped them and then thought, "ah too much trouble". Good riddance. The 6% he contributed was cr*p anyway. This move, unlike the others, has 0 impact on the Bills future. One way or the other. 564356[/snapback] I disagree. An excellent coach can add 3 wins a season and a bad can subtract 3. Mularkey I rated as a -2. destined for failure at any venue.
Draconator Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 We are REALLY in Arizona Cardinals territory now. 563971[/snapback] Wrong. Arizona is playing in a fabulous new stadium next year, while the Bills are playing in a 30 year old plus stadium. No matter how many upgrades you do, it's still an old park.
Sound_n_Fury Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 Wrong. Arizona is playing in a fabulous new stadium next year, while the Bills are playing in a 30 year old plus stadium. No matter how many upgrades you do, it's still an old park. 564369[/snapback] And the Cards' attendance averages about 40,000 per game...the lowest in the NFL. Who cares about a new stadium where more people will probably be out in the halls walking around than sitting in the seats. 2005 2002 and 2003
OGTEleven Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 This latest news about Mularkey resigning convinces me the situation with the Bills is out of control. I can understand him quitting, since he was basically being given a vote of no confidence, and being forced to fire all the assistants, yet still would be held responsible for the team's performance. The situation was designed for him to fail I suppose you could say this clears the decks and hope for better, but I tend to read it as leaving the scene in chaos. Marv is a rookie GM, the entire coaching staff will be new, and the direction fo the team is in complete flux. It's going back to less than squre one. Those of you who wanted the whole thing blown up, you go your wish. I predict people will be looking back on the good old days of Tom Donahoe within a year. Donohoe's decisions may not all have worked out, but he had a plan, and was rational, and he did not make hysterical changes based on the mood of the fans or the result of the last three games. I see no signs of steadiness in this organization, at any level. We are REALLY in Arizona Cardinals territory now. 563971[/snapback] I agree with part of that and disagree with other parts. I don't think the Bills were setting Mularkey up so that he could fail. I thihnk they genuinly wanted to win with him and that Marv would have given him fair shot in the truest sense (meaning he would not be looking for miracles, but a sense of confidence in Mularkey's program). The coaches that were already let go, for the most parrt, needed to be let go. I agree that we are presently in chaos and that Marv has his work cut out for him. If he chooses a head coach well, we will be ok; albeit with an adjustment period. I think that Mularkey would have undergone his own adjustment period being under a new management with a new staff anyway. He may have pulled this off, but it was far from certain. It would be a difficult circumstance for anyone. I hope that the family thing is the typical smokescreen but my guess is that it is real. With some reports (Mora Jr.'s example) already out there, it is likely there are more. He may have simply chosen his family's sanity over his football career's progress. If so, good for him and shame on Buffalo. There is no excuse for abusing someone's children over a friggin football team. I disagree that we will look back longingly at TD. While he did have strong points such as projecting a professional image, he also had weak points. Five years is a long time in the NFL to emerge with a 5-11 record whatever the excuses. Even so, I think he would have held his job if he had projected a little friendlier face over the years. This year, he repeatedly said things like "believe me....we all feel worse about this than the fans." To me, it didn't ring true. I'm just one person but I didn't get a feel from Donahoe that he really had any empathy for how much the fans in Buffalo really want to win. It has always been the community's team. TD seemed to take an approach that said "We're the pros from Dover. Sit back and watch us deliver a top notch team to this community." I never got the sense that the team and community were one and the same. TD is not wholly to blame for this, but he is partly to blame. He seemed to try to do some things to communicate (Ask the GM) but in the end, they seemed cookie cutter and contrived. Marv will not have this problem.
IowaBills Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 This latest news about Mularkey resigning convinces me the situation with the Bills is out of control. I can understand him quitting, since he was basically being given a vote of no confidence, and being forced to fire all the assistants, yet still would be held responsible for the team's performance. The situation was designed for him to fail I suppose you could say this clears the decks and hope for better, but I tend to read it as leaving the scene in chaos. Marv is a rookie GM, the entire coaching staff will be new, and the direction fo the team is in complete flux. It's going back to less than squre one. Those of you who wanted the whole thing blown up, you go your wish. I predict people will be looking back on the good old days of Tom Donahoe within a year. Donohoe's decisions may not all have worked out, but he had a plan, and was rational, and he did not make hysterical changes based on the mood of the fans or the result of the last three games. I see no signs of steadiness in this organization, at any level. We are REALLY in Arizona Cardinals territory now. 563971[/snapback] Um, the good old days of Tom Donohoe? How many times did we make the playoffs under TD? So if we don't make the playoffs in the next 5 years, I guess it would be just like TD's tenure now wouldn't it? When something is not working, the best thing to do is change it. TD and MM were not getting the job done, and I for one am glad to see both of them go. At least we now get a fresh start, a GM and a coach who come in here knowing that (most) Bills fans absolutely will not tolerate mediocrity, and maybe that will inspire them to do what is necessary to put a winning team out on the field.
kasper13 Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 I disagree 100%. I think the Bills are much better off tonight than they were a week ago at this time. Marv is back. Jim Haslett is on the way and two of the biggest turds to ever run a Bills Football team are gone. There will never be such a thing as "the Good Old Days of Tom Donahoe". The Bills hit rock bottom with their play this past season and the pure and utter garbage we had in TD and MM (and GW) is finally over and done with. There is nowhere to go but up.
Alaska Darin Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 two of the biggest turds to ever run a Bills Football team are gone564469[/snapback] You need to look back at BILLS history a little closer because that statement is so far off it's ridiculous. Hint: The franchise started before 1990.
PatPatPatSack Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 I disagree. An excellent coach can add 3 wins a season and a bad can subtract 3. Mularkey I rated as a -2. destined for failure at any venue. 564367[/snapback] Allow me to offer unassailable scientific proof (as opposed to your simple conjectures). Witness the wild swings in performance, as measured by win loss records of so many coaches in the NFL one year to the next. In most cases coaching is the same. I am sure you could build a case that NFL coaching is far more stable than the player makeup of a team, simply because there are fewer coaches and the player chemistry of the team requires at least 11 players on each side of the ball. Also coaches don't get injured (enough). But when you have a stable team you usually have a stable record. My specific example - though you can probably find better ones: Last years defense vs. this years. No coaching changes yet the defense changed dramatically with injuries and performance changed dramatically. The same could be said for the Offense of the superbowl years. We had remarkable player stablility for the run and once the players were gone, the teams performance changed. And there you have it, pure science at work.
KOKBILLS Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 This latest news about Mularkey resigning convinces me the situation with the Bills is out of control. I can understand him quitting, since he was basically being given a vote of no confidence, and being forced to fire all the assistants, yet still would be held responsible for the team's performance. The situation was designed for him to fail I suppose you could say this clears the decks and hope for better, but I tend to read it as leaving the scene in chaos. Marv is a rookie GM, the entire coaching staff will be new, and the direction fo the team is in complete flux. It's going back to less than squre one. Those of you who wanted the whole thing blown up, you go your wish. I predict people will be looking back on the good old days of Tom Donahoe within a year. Donohoe's decisions may not all have worked out, but he had a plan, and was rational, and he did not make hysterical changes based on the mood of the fans or the result of the last three games. I see no signs of steadiness in this organization, at any level. We are REALLY in Arizona Cardinals territory now. 563971[/snapback] Oh yes no question....31-49 over the past 5 Years...but today they hit rock bottom... Only one way to go then...
Dr. K Posted January 13, 2006 Author Posted January 13, 2006 I disagree 100%. I think the Bills are much better off tonight than they were a week ago at this time. Marv is back. Jim Haslett is on the way and two of the biggest turds to ever run a Bills Football team are gone. There will never be such a thing as "the Good Old Days of Tom Donahoe". The Bills hit rock bottom with their play this past season and the pure and utter garbage we had in TD and MM (and GW) is finally over and done with. There is nowhere to go but up. 564469[/snapback] If you think this season was "rock bottom" then you were not a Bills fan before 1987. I predict you are going to see real "rock bottom" in the next three years.
Dr. K Posted January 13, 2006 Author Posted January 13, 2006 I agree with part of that and disagree with other parts. I don't think the Bills were setting Mularkey up so that he could fail. I thihnk they genuinly wanted to win with him and that Marv would have given him fair shot in the truest sense (meaning he would not be looking for miracles, but a sense of confidence in Mularkey's program). The coaches that were already let go, for the most parrt, needed to be let go. I agree that we are presently in chaos and that Marv has his work cut out for him. If he chooses a head coach well, we will be ok; albeit with an adjustment period. I think that Mularkey would have undergone his own adjustment period being under a new management with a new staff anyway. He may have pulled this off, but it was far from certain. It would be a difficult circumstance for anyone. I hope that the family thing is the typical smokescreen but my guess is that it is real. With some reports (Mora Jr.'s example) already out there, it is likely there are more. He may have simply chosen his family's sanity over his football career's progress. If so, good for him and shame on Buffalo. There is no excuse for abusing someone's children over a friggin football team. I disagree that we will look back longingly at TD. While he did have strong points such as projecting a professional image, he also had weak points. Five years is a long time in the NFL to emerge with a 5-11 record whatever the excuses. Even so, I think he would have held his job if he had projected a little friendlier face over the years. This year, he repeatedly said things like "believe me....we all feel worse about this than the fans." To me, it didn't ring true. I'm just one person but I didn't get a feel from Donahoe that he really had any empathy for how much the fans in Buffalo really want to win. It has always been the community's team. TD seemed to take an approach that said "We're the pros from Dover. Sit back and watch us deliver a top notch team to this community." I never got the sense that the team and community were one and the same. TD is not wholly to blame for this, but he is partly to blame. He seemed to try to do some things to communicate (Ask the GM) but in the end, they seemed cookie cutter and contrived. Marv will not have this problem. 564425[/snapback] I agree fundamentally. When I said that Mularkey was being set up to fail, I did not mean that it was done deliberately. I meant that the situation was such that his likelihood of failing was very high, no matter how good a job he did. Modrak living in Florida, Ralph intervening in team operations, wholesale dismissal of the coaching staff, divided responsibilities, etc. I agree that Wilson and Levy want the Bills to win. But the organizational mess left in the wake of Donohoe's firing and the underminind of Mularkey is not conducive for building a winning team. I overstated in referring to "the good old days" of Donohoe. Of course these have not been good days. I was frustrated by his arrogance, by his dumping Steve Christie as if he could pick up a first rate kicker just anywhere, by his thinking Bledsoe was going to solve the QB problems, by his hiring Gregg Williams (whom I was ready to hope would work out better). But he also was a strong football man, who had a vision. You knew who was in charge. Maybe all this will work out, but I think the decks are stacked against this team pretty highly right now. I feel more this is 1983 than it is 1989. I fear we are in for a spell of absolute bottom-of-the-league performance; I fully expect several 3-13, 2-14 seasons in the next few years. I used to think that, despite the fact that Bills fans on this board were all hysterical, the team management was under control. Now I feel like the management is an accurate reflection of the desperation and bad judgment of the fans.
Recommended Posts