Johnny Posted January 19, 2006 Posted January 19, 2006 at the very least, surely the new staff couldnt mis-handle the young quarterback any worse. Kinda like a horse with potential that was handled by bad trainers.......(seabiscuit, a prime example) time will tell and i will continue to tell time
granitestatebillsbackers Posted January 19, 2006 Posted January 19, 2006 Good observation--and I would add that TD's firing saved it as well. There is a story on TBD analyzing personnel. It indicates that Losman pretty much gave up. I take that not as an indictment of his commitment to play in the NFL, but a very human reaction to what he must have sensed was the GM, coach and veterans cutting and running on his season. I don't care how much you have your s*it together, if you are heralded as the starter, then four games in you see the organization panicking, you probably are pissed off, too. Interesting side note: remember all the bigmouths who were blabbering "HOLCOMB GIVES US THE BEST CHANCE TO WIN, BLAH BLAH BLAH ETC ETC.?" Haven't heard from them lately, have you? After KH's spectacular performance in NY to top off a stellar season, I don't hear a lot of calls for him to be the starter in 2006. Forget the stats--sure, Holcomb did outperform Losman over the eight games he played. He damned well better, considering he is a career backup and Losman has played a grand total of eight games. GO BILLS!!!
Simon Posted January 19, 2006 Posted January 19, 2006 Firing of Mularkey could have saved Losmans carrer Yeah because his past work with Kordell Stewart and Tommy Maddox certainly shows he has no grasp on how to handle QB's.
Tcali Posted January 19, 2006 Posted January 19, 2006 at the very least, surely the new staff couldnt mis-handle the young quarterback any worse. Kinda like a horse with potential that was handled by bad trainers.......(seabiscuit, a prime example) time will tell and i will continue to tell time 574646[/snapback] Hmmmm/.....what about that QB coach of ours?....uhhhh..whatshisname......oh Wyche. I am no big MM fan....but lets get back on planet earth for a moment here.
Johnny Posted January 19, 2006 Author Posted January 19, 2006 Hmmmm/.....what about that QB coach of ours?....uhhhh..whatshisname......oh Wyche. I am no big MM fan....but lets get back on planet earth for a moment here. 574668[/snapback] youre way off the planet if you think wyche made jp losman the starter before training camp, let bledsoe go, and then made in season bench/play/start decisions.
Kultarr Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 Yeah because his past work with Kordell Stewart and Tommy Maddox certainly shows he has no grasp on how to handle QB's. 574662[/snapback] Actually, the guy that Mike Mularkey fired before he quit, Tom Clements, was the QB coach for the years (01-03) when KS and TM actually looked respectable. Before TC was hired as QB coach, MM was on staff and KS was highly erratic. Few people will probably want to hear this, but there is the distinct possibility that Mularkey fired the best QB coach available out there now.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 Actually, the guy that Mike Mularkey fired before he quit, Tom Clements was the QB coach for the years when KS and TM actually looked respectable. Before TC was hired as QB coach, MM was on staff and KS was highly erratic. Few people will probably want to hear this, but there is the distinct possibility that Mularkey fired the best QB coach the Bills might have had a chance at landing. Clements wouldn't have taken a demotion and stayed with the Bills as a QB coach any more than Wade would have stayed as a DC back in 2001.
Kultarr Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 Clements wouldn't have taken a demotion and stayed with the Bills as a QB coach any more than Wade would have stayed as a DC back in 2001. 574767[/snapback] True. But, that is another story. I'm just giving props to Clements' work in Pittsburgh; his coaching and their decent play are perfectly synchronous in time. (When he wasn't around, those two have been pretty awful.) Coincidence? I doubt it.
dave mcbride Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 Yeah because his past work with Kordell Stewart and Tommy Maddox certainly shows he has no grasp on how to handle QB's. 574662[/snapback] you know i'm ann mm-in-pitt fan simon, but he didn't do much with stewart - he simply decided to run the ball a lot. stewart still sucked. now maddox, there's another matter. the greatest spinning of silk out of a sow's ear in recent nfl history, in my opinion.
Simon Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 Actually, the guy that Mike Mularkey fired before he quit, Tom Clements, was the QB coach for the years (01-03) when KS and TM actually looked respectable. Before TC was hired as QB coach, MM was on staff and KS was highly erratic. Few people will probably want to hear this, but there is the distinct possibility that Mularkey fired the best QB coach available out there now. 574763[/snapback] He was on staff but he was the TE coach at the time, so he had nothing to do with the QB's. I agree that props go to Clements for the work he did there, but it's probably also no co-incidence that those awful Stillers QB's finally started playing well for the only time in their careers as soon as Mularkey took over as the O-Coordinator. Cya
jarthur31 Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 at the very least, surely the new staff couldnt mis-handle the young quarterback any worse. Kinda like a horse with potential that was handled by bad trainers.......(seabiscuit, a prime example) time will tell and i will continue to tell time 574646[/snapback] I don't think it was his choice. Ralph, TD, and the rest of the coaching staff should've sat down and discussed what they wanted to accomplish this season. Try and win now and aim for the playoffs or rebuild the O with a rookie at QB. It was really as simple as that. Just don't waiver once the choice has been made. Then we wouldn't have developmental probs with JP.
Buftex Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 Interesting side note: remember all the bigmouths who were blabbering "HOLCOMB GIVES US THE BEST CHANCE TO WIN, BLAH BLAH BLAH ETC ETC.?" Haven't heard from them lately, have you? After KH's spectacular performance in NY to top off a stellar season, I don't hear a lot of calls for him to be the starter in 2006. GO BILLS!!! 574652[/snapback] At the time that Losaman was benched, after week 4, Holcomb did give the Bills a better chance to win. Losman had absolutely nothing that showed he was ready to even begin progressing into a competent NFL QB. At that point, nobody knew how gawd awful the defense would continue to play. There was still some hope that the Bills could make a stab at the playoffs. I was as vocal as anybody, that Losman needed to sit. When Losman returned to the lineup, against KC, and played very well, it was an indication to me, that benching him was the best thing Mularkey did all season. He made a lot of progress, just sitting down and observing for a few weeks. The game that broke the final straw for the Bills was the Chargers game. It was, IMO, the worst team effort of the last 5 seasons. After that game, what ever little hope that there was that the Bills would turn anything around, was dashed. That is where Mularkey lost me. I am pretty convinced that the Chargers loss was where TD, and MM to a lesser degree, went into complete damage control mode, trying to secure their jobs. Holcomb was/is the better QB, but at that point, he was no so much better that Losman should have been sitting. Please don't take things out of context! Also, has anyone heard, or seen, anything to indicate that the new "regime" has their heart set on Losman or Holcomb next year? I suspect they will be back, but the only time I heard Levy broach the topic of the Bills QB, was "you have to have a vetran quarterback..." It will be interesting to see what happens. I suspect the Bills make a run at a bigger "name" QB than Holcomb, and JP backs him up...Holcomb will stay too, but neither will be the starter going into next season. Just a hunch...
ChasBB Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 All this talk about the QB -- Losman/Bledsoe/Holcomb means squat. Fix the O-line and the QB situation will take care of itself.
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 He was on staff but he was the TE coach at the time, so he had nothing to do with the QB's. Which is, I dare say, also part of the point. Giving MM credit before 2001 doesn't make sense for two reasons: 1) Kordell Stewart wasn't very good before '01. 2) Mularkey was coaching TEs. Indeed, the Steelers did not have a QB coach before Clements in '01. So, it is possible that MM, as well as the rest of the offensive staff, worked with the QBs to some degree. I don't know. But whatever the situation, KS didn't start playing well until after Tom Clements was hired. I agree that props go to Clements for the work he did there, but it's probably also no co-incidence that those awful Stillers QB's finally started playing well for the only time in their careers as soon as Mularkey took over as the O-Coordinator. My memory of those 3 years in Steeler-land was that MM and the offensive coaching staff did get a lot of accolades. They opened up the offense, were running exciting gadget plays more, and so on. In '02, especially, people were high on MM because it seemed like he was an absolute genius -- anybody that could make Tommy Maddox an NFL QB must surely be a genius, right? But, by the end of '03, the luster on MM's crown had taken a real beating and people were really souring on his pass-happy Sandlot offense. Maddox was starting to look like Maddox and not the NFL comeback player of the year. Many even felt that Cowher was going to fire Mularkey; Cowher was promising that the offense was going to return to running the ball and a physical game. Out of that morass of "will he stay or will he get fired", Tom Donahoe rode in to town and snatched Mularkey out of Pittsburgh to be his new head man. Donahoe stated that he had tried going with someone he hadn't worked with before in Williams, so this time he wanted to tab a guy he knew and trusted. Oddly, he also went off on how Mularkey was going to bring his brand of tough football -- both mentally and physically -- to Buffalo. (Unsurprisingly, that simply never happened. ) Furthermore, we can throw in a report that Mularkey actually wanted to bring Ken Whisenhunt with him out of Steeler-land and not Tom Clements. Interestingly enough, some of the "Sandlot Offense" (what I prefer to call it) that the Steelers fancied from '01-'03 showed up in Buffalo (Roscoe Parrish playing QB, etc.?) while the smash-mouth offense Donahoe had promised was re-installed back in Pittsburgh by Ken Whisenhunt, who is now an up-and-comer in the coaching ranks himself. Makes one wonder if Cowher was stringing his old boss out one more time...
Tcali Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 All this talk about the QB -- Losman/Bledsoe/Holcomb means squat. Fix the O-line and the QB situation will take care of itself. 574967[/snapback] JP made many many horrible plays this year when he had very good protection. Holcomb threw 2 yards to Moulds on 4th and more than 2 with the game on the line and all freakin year to throw the ball.YES--the QB position will improve with the O-line fixed--but if you think it will just 'take care of itself' you are not thinking clearly.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 i know inside the nfl blows...but tonight they had mike holmgren on there and he said when he decided to trade for matt hasselback he put his rep on the line and thathe had to stick with him and let him develop. at one point matt was the worst rated passer in football and even lost his job to trent dilfer,but when trent got back the time off gave matt renewed vigor in being a qb...............kinda like losman except mike mularky never really embraced him.mike had no balls at all glasd that sh--head is gone..........if mike was a real coach he cnever should have proclaimed it was jp's job at the beginning of camp.he should have made jp earn it.i would of rather seen kelly satrt the season and as we developed and jp as well let him ease in...bottom line mike really mishandled the whole qb thing...go bills in'06 and go jp
Tcali Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 i know inside the nfl blows...but tonight they had mike holmgren on there and he said when he decided to trade for matt hasselback he put his rep on the line and thathe had to stick with him and let him develop. at one point matt was the worst rated passer in football and even lost his job to trent dilfer,but when trent got back the time off gave matt renewed vigor in being a qb...............kinda like losman except mike mularky never really embraced him.mike had no balls at all glasd that sh--head is gone..........if mike was a real coach he cnever should have proclaimed it was jp's job at the beginning of camp.he should have made jp earn it.i would of rather seen kelly satrt the season and as we developed and jp as well let him ease in...bottom line mike really mishandled the whole qb thing...go bills in'06 and go jp 575029[/snapback] yes.. agreed....put us back a year
Buftex Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 i know inside the nfl blows...but tonight they had mike holmgren on there and he said when he decided to trade for matt hasselback he put his rep on the line and thathe had to stick with him and let him develop. at one point matt was the worst rated passer in football and even lost his job to trent dilfer,but when trent got back the time off gave matt renewed vigor in being a qb...............kinda like losman except mike mularky never really embraced him.mike had no balls at all glasd that sh--head is gone..........if mike was a real coach he cnever should have proclaimed it was jp's job at the beginning of camp.he should have made jp earn it.i would of rather seen kelly satrt the season and as we developed and jp as well let him ease in...bottom line mike really mishandled the whole qb thing...go bills in'06 and go jp 575029[/snapback] It was Donohoe's call, not Mularkeys! MM had no choice but to go along with it...MM liked Losman, but knew he wasn't ready for what was to come. He would have preferred to keep Bledsoe another year, but TD (and maybe RW) had other ideas.
OGTEleven Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 at the very least, surely the new staff couldnt mis-handle the young quarterback any worse. Kinda like a horse with potential that was handled by bad trainers.......(seabiscuit, a prime example) time will tell and i will continue to tell time 574646[/snapback] Sunny Jim Fitzsimmons was a bad trainer?
Recommended Posts