I love it that the Bills are being dishonest!

[Pyrite Gal]

One of the things I really like about how this team is being run is that all sorts of info is being sent out of the depth chart, with rumors to the press and from official statements which is in essence contradictory.

 

Who is the #2 WR with Evans? The website says Reed. An article in the D & C says Price. The team has only kept one FB so this likely means 3 WR sets but does this mean Parrish is the #3 since he ws working out in the slot in camp or is it one of these #2 candidates?

 

Quite frankly I do not care. Fool me, lie to me or whatever because it is more important to give as little information as possible to the opposing HC than to satisfy my curiosity.

 

BB is a bright boy so he probab;y will not be fooled and he will prep the same way regardless of whether re rotate the DL alot or if it really means a lot in terms of PT that 4th round draftee Williams is starting at DT rather than last year's inherited starter Anderson or first round DT draftee McCargo.

 

Even if there is a small chance that BB will be dustracted for a moment or waste even a millisecond with uncertainty this is far more valuable to me that knowing correct info about what Jauron is going to do for sure.

 

I'll find out soon enough when the game starts and as long as Jauron is not lying to my face in his mandatory post-game interview I appreciate if he tips nothing off to the other team with his comments and game analysis.

 

Particularly since we are facing Bb I love it that we are hoing into this game with no tendencies yet and with the vanilla playcalling in pre-season without the real Bills D and O scheme being shown yet.

[Sen. John Blutarsky]

One of the things I really like about how this team is being run is that all sorts of info is being sent out of the depth chart, with rumors to the press and from official statements which is in essence contradictory.

 

Who is the #2 WR with Evans?  The website says Reed. An article in the D & C says Price.  The team has only kept one FB so this likely means 3 WR sets but does this mean Parrish is the #3 since he ws working out in the slot in camp or is it one of these #2 candidates?

 

Quite frankly I do not care.  Fool me, lie to me or whatever because it is more important to give as little information as possible to the opposing HC than to satisfy my curiosity.

 

BB is a bright boy so he probab;y will not be fooled and he will prep the same way regardless of whether re rotate the DL alot or if it really means a lot in terms of PT that 4th round draftee Williams is starting at DT rather than last year's inherited starter Anderson or first round DT draftee McCargo.

 

Even if there is a small chance that BB will be dustracted for a moment or waste even a millisecond with uncertainty this is far more valuable to me that knowing correct info about what Jauron is going to do for sure.

 

I'll find out soon enough when the game starts and as long as Jauron is not lying to my face in his mandatory post-game interview I appreciate if he tips nothing off to the other team with his comments and game analysis.

 

Particularly since we are facing Bb I love it that we are hoing into this game with no tendencies yet and with the vanilla playcalling in pre-season without the real Bills D and O scheme being shown yet.

763598[/snapback]

I agree. As long as WE know what we're doing it's cool. Last year I don't think that WE knew what we were doing so what looked like subterfuge was really just idiocy.

 

BTW: Thank you

[Mile High]

If you listen to the JPL press conference today on BB.com a reporter asks him if he is excited to have Lee and Peerless starting.

[Dibs]

Price will start Sunday for Bills

 

LINK

[Pyrite Gal]

I agree.  As long as WE know what we're doing it's cool.  Last year I don't think that WE knew what we were doing so what looked like subterfuge was really just idiocy.

 

BTW:  Thank you 

763602[/snapback]

 

What do you think was the difference between the team's performance under MM in 04 and the results in 05?

 

It interests me because of the broadbrush accusations of him being an idiot in 05 (the results were certainly those of an idiot) but if this really was the reason I suspect he was also an idiot in '04.

 

What explains the difference between him doing HC work that fell short of where we wanted to be but did produce a winning record and the 05 team which posted a losing mark on the road to falling short. Or is there no difference between getting a wining record and gettng a losing record?

[billsfanmiami(oh)]

Personally, I'd rather have a team that comes out and says what they are going to do and then goes out on the field and does it. Those are the kind of teams that win superbowls. BB is not loosing a second of sleep over the fact that Josh Reed is listed as a starting WR on the depth chart of the team's website while other media outlets report that it's Peerless Price. I'm fairly confident that this administration is not trying to do that kinda thing at all. Probably just something as simple as a miscommunication. IMO, the kind of thing you're alluding to is pretty "busch league" and something that the previous administration would resort to. I'd like to hope that Jauron & Co. are above that.

[stuckincincy]

Who starts a game is important to the player whose contract stipulates that he gets extra money for having this or that many starts.

 

I can't imagine any NFL team not having a pretty good idea what their opposition's line-up will be. If Reed or Price lines up for the 1st snap, what's the difference to the Pats? Say Reed is in for the first snap, then Price for the 2nd - I don't think the defense is going to go into a panic...

[Dibs]

.....I don't think the defense is going to go into a panic...

763634[/snapback]

Though that would be really funny.

Tedy scans the offence. "Oh no, oh no. Look everybody! It's Peerless Price not Josh Reed over there."

Marvin rushes over to his side. "Oh 'expletive deleted'! He's right. Damn Bilichick, he told us it'd be Reed."

Tedy addresses entire defense "Don't panic! Nobody panic, it'll be alright."

Vince from a fetal position on the ground while sucking his thumb "Doomed. We're Dooooomed! Bwah ha ha."

Rosevelt runs around & around in circles, hitting himself on the head while the Bills snap the ball....

[stuckincincy]

Though that would be really funny.

Tedy scans the offence.  "Oh no, oh no.  Look everybody!  It's Peerless Price not Josh Reed over there."

 

763635[/snapback]

 

With Brady being on most every week's injury report last season with his "sore right shoulder", think of all those silly coaches who planned on back-up Cassel taking the Pat's snaps...

 

The starter sit-downs as punishment for sins like missing team meetings can bite. Everybody knows the guy will be in after a play or two, and might say "big deal". And it is, if it peels some big ones off the guy's contract.

 

 

It's been used to ill effect, too.

 

In 1997, B'gals owner pleaded with Boomer Esaison to play, to prop up that edition of the sad-sack '90's clubs.

 

Esaison lit it up - had a 3 and 1 streak, a couple of 400 yard passing games, was named AFC Player of the Month...then the terminaly cheap owner Mike Brown sat him down so as not to pay bonus money. Bad blood ensued.

 

See also Brown vs. Bruce Coslet and Brown vs. Sam Wyche and Brown vs. Dick LeBeau and Brown vs. the IRS and Brown vs. the entire team (players used to have to bring their own food and towels to camp).

 

Mikie found religion in 2004 (actually, he responded to the intense calumny of the media and the fans after he took the county and its idiot voters to the cleaners over his new, free stadium) when AFC Comback Player of the Year Jon Kitna was one snap short of a million buck bonus. He forked it over...folks were stunned.

[inkman]

Price will start Sunday for Bills

 

LINK

763609[/snapback]

 

Who is the #2 WR with Evans? The website says Reed. An article in the D & C says Price. The team has only kept one FB so this likely means 3 WR sets but does this mean Parrish is the #3 since he ws working out in the slot in camp or is it one of these #2 candidates?

[ganesh]

What do you think was the difference between the team's performance under MM in 04 and the results in 05?

 

It interests me because of the broadbrush accusations of him being an idiot in 05 (the results were certainly those of an idiot) but if this really was the reason I suspect he was also an idiot in '04.

 

What explains the difference between him doing HC work that fell short of where we wanted to be but did produce a winning record and the 05 team which posted a losing mark on the road to falling short. Or is there no difference between getting a wining record and gettng a losing record?

763621[/snapback]

 

I think it was the inability to handle veterans...In 2004, Drew Bledsoe was the QB and there was no in-fighting within the team....However, in 2005, when JP was

made the starter, veterans like Moulds, Fletcher, Adams, Vincent took it on themselves to fight with the coach and also got their upper-hand with Holcomb starting and thus dividing the locker room...Mularkey had no clue to stop this and that in the end was his downfall.

[Nervous Guy]

Personally, I'd rather have a team that comes out and says what they are going to do and then goes out on the field and does it. Those are the kind of teams that win superbowls. BB is not loosing a second of sleep over the fact that Josh Reed is listed as a starting WR on the depth chart of the team's website while other media outlets report that it's Peerless Price. I'm fairly confident that this administration is not trying to do that kinda thing at all. Probably just something as simple as a miscommunication. IMO, the kind of thing you're alluding to is pretty "busch league" and something that the previous administration would resort to. I'd like to hope that Jauron & Co. are above that.

763627[/snapback]

so...have you actually paid attention to how BB and the Pats have operated during their Super Bowl years?

[MDH]

It interests me because of the broadbrush accusations of him being an idiot in 05 (the results were certainly those of an idiot) but if this really was the reason I suspect he was also an idiot in '04.

 

What explains the difference between him doing HC work that fell short of where we wanted to be but did produce a winning record and the 05 team which posted a losing mark on the road to falling short.

763621[/snapback]

 

Mularkey isn't (and wasn't) an idiot. The difference between his first year as HC and his second was preasure, or rather his inability to make correct decisions while under lots of preasure. There was very little preasure during his first season and loads of it last year. Mularkey sold his soul in an attempt to meet the expectations that the team, media and fans set for the Bills in the pre-season. In doing so he buckled to the vets, argued with coaches and pretty much set the team back an entire year.

 

Some people thrive in preasure filled environements and some people fold. Mularkey is one of the folders.

[stevewin]

What do you think was the difference between the team's performance under MM in 04 and the results in 05?

 

It interests me because of the broadbrush accusations of him being an idiot in 05 (the results were certainly those of an idiot) but if this really was the reason I suspect he was also an idiot in '04.

 

What explains the difference between him doing HC work that fell short of where we wanted to be but did produce a winning record and the 05 team which posted a losing mark on the road to falling short. Or is there no difference between getting a wining record and gettng a losing record?

763621[/snapback]

I am always intrigued by the press MM got in 2004 when things started bad and at the time was praised for "staying the course" and there was a much quoted item when he apparently gathered the team after their poor start and said "There is no Plan B".

 

At the time that was viewed as some sort of laudable response - to not get flustered and stay with the plan. But more and more I am convinced that he *literally* meant there was no Plan B - he had no answer. Faced w/ no alternative - the guys in the locker room just kept playing hard (and as we all know benefitted from an easy schedule). In 2005 I think things just caught up w/ MM and possibly the guys on the team started to realize maybe he just didn't have it - and we didn't have the talent or easy schedule to overcome the disarray of the front office and coaching.

 

It still gives me chills to think that MM would be our coach now if he didn't choose to quit. A lot of credit is given to Marv and Jauron and it is easy to think of them as coming in together and changing the attitude of the franchise - but the fact is that if MM chose to stay the team and the attitude (and the outlook) would probably be a hell of a lot different than it is now.

[Pyrite Gal]

I think it was the inability to handle veterans...In 2004, Drew Bledsoe was the QB and there was no in-fighting within the team....However,  in 2005, when JP was

made the starter, veterans like Moulds, Fletcher, Adams, Vincent took it on themselves to fight with the coach and also got their upper-hand with Holcomb starting and thus dividing the locker room...Mularkey had no clue to stop this and that in the end was his downfall.

763811[/snapback]

 

I think you might be on the right track with this, Part of what I felt was a management approach that made a real difference for the Bills in 04 was the seemingly minor decision to cut Bobby Shaw round about the 5th game or so.

 

This was a reasonable cut to make from a football sense as Shaw was the 4th or 5th WR on a team which sometimes went to 3 WR sets but only went to an empty backfield in garbage time. Shaw seemed to generally be seen as a good locker room guy who was originally signed as a #3 WR but had actually provved to be our #2 and even our #1 WR at times the year before when Moulds got hurt and Josh Reed was struggling. I believe they needed a spot because another team was sniffing around Peters on our PS, so we needed a roster spot for him.

 

The interesting thing was that after a player has been active for a couple of games or so, the team is on the hook for his entire annual salary (this agreement makes it so the team has no interest in cutting and re-adding a player to the roster to save a nickel here or there and also make the accounting much simpler to do as there is no pro-rating of payments owed or beyond distribution of the bonus). The Bills gained nothing from choosing to cut Shaw and in fact paid out more to a player who gave them nothing than they would have if they cut a rookie who played little. He was not a locker-room cancer.

 

However, by cuttig Shaw MM sent a message to the vets that everyone on this team needed to contribute or the risked being let go even if it cost the Bills a couple of bucks to do this.

 

Suddenly, the team got much more productive in their play. Perhaps this was a coincidence, but I think it served as a marginal motivator.

 

However, I think that the team can get away with motivating its workers through fear rather than mutual respect only if it pays off (and they did not make the playoffs) or with older players who have been around and do not trust the corporation anyway.

 

It would not surprse me if what happened here was that when times got tough in 05 as the team really needed to step up to deal with having a young QB and also the injury to TKO, the team was not really a TEAM because they had motivated players through fear of losing their job.

 

NE in 2001 and beyond was in fact a TEAM which motivated players because they depended on each other. Thus even with a young QB like brady who was great but was obviously learning the game his first year of a lot of play and even when they had sudden critical injuries they pulled for each other.

 

I think both vets and young players respond well to leadership that inspires a sense of family rather than a sense of fear. Fear can motivate well, but you can only go to that well a few times before it dries up as people begin to worry more aboutprotecting themselves rather than protecting each other.

 

I think this may be part of the difference in production under MM in 04 and MM in 05.

 

The interesting abou