thebug Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Why, what have 20 of the other 31 teams done? So it's fine with you to fail as long as we're in good company then. Well, good for you. My standards are a little higher. For continuity see Patriots, Chargers, Colts, ... OOOPS! Mentioned two teams with GMs let go by the Bills. My bad. In my world one strives for the best. Here everything stagnates with so called fans rummaging through the team's braintrust's laundry baskets looking for sniffs to get high on. Why are you a Bills fan? Why don't you switch to one of those teams then.
WellDressed Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 And why not, most of you support it. There's no accountability in Buffalo OK, enough, you've asked for it...... here comes a bucket full of boiling hot teeth.....better duck..
MikeInABQ Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 I wonder how long Green Bay's gonna give their new guy if he stinks.
Dan Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 So you're suggesting that we keep hiring coordinators with zip for experience, GMs that don't have any either, coaches that have only failed, all while keeping the top of a personnel office that has never had any success anywhere. Boy, you're one astute analyst. LMAO No. Apparently, you're the challenged one. What I suggested was.... you post a topic stating "The Problem with this Franchise... ...is that there's not much continuity." Then in your initial post you suggest a litany of changes that have occurred, most of which prior to the current management. Then follow that up with continued suggestions that we need a new FO and HC with experience. So, you state we need continuity; but then you suggest we should bring in new personnel to fix the problems on the team. Can you not see the confusion there? The fact is... we currently have and are building considerable continuity on this team. Brandon has been here for quite a few years and was essentially Marv's right hand man (supposedly learning the job) for 2 years. Jauron has been the HC for 3 years now. Turk was promoted to OC, why? To provide continuity on the offense. Yes, we changed QBs but that was (arguably) the best decision for the team to be a winner. Many of the other positions (OL, CB, S, DE) have the same guys now for 2 or more years. So how is that not building continuity? So no, I'm not suggesting we hire anyone. I'm suggesting that you don't build continuity and stability by changing your FO and HC every 2 years because they haven't made it to the playoffs.
krazykat Posted July 31, 2008 Author Posted July 31, 2008 Why are you a Bills fan? Why don't you switch to one of those teams then. So you're validating my point then? Why don't I switch? Is that the dumbest question I've been asked? You say I'm no fan, but even through this I stick around. Yeah, great logic. Par for the course for many here.
krazykat Posted July 31, 2008 Author Posted July 31, 2008 So, you state we need continuity; but then you suggest we should bring in new personnel to fix the problems on the team. Can you not see the confusion there? The fact is... we currently have and are building considerable continuity on this team. Brandon has been here for quite a few years and was essentially Marv's right hand man (supposedly learning the job) for 2 years. Jauron has been the HC for 3 years now. Turk was promoted to OC, why? To provide continuity on the offense. Yes, we changed QBs but that was (arguably) the best decision for the team to be a winner. Many of the other positions (OL, CB, S, DE) have the same guys now for 2 or more years. So how is that not building continuity? So no, I'm not suggesting we hire anyone. I'm suggesting that you don't build continuity and stability by changing your FO and HC every 2 years because they haven't made it to the playoffs. LMAO Yeah, the status quo has been working just fine. Naturally you missed the perfect correlation between the lack of continuity and the current front office. Perfect!
Buftex Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 ...is that there's not much continuity. We make idiotic decisions hiring OCs like Gilbride or Fairchild, which again, should be known by people considered to be "experts" and should know more than all of us collectively but don't, nor do even a rudimentary amount of research on them beyond the highly superficial. We make those idiotic moves because our GMs suck who hire poor head coaches. Donahoe sucked yet everyone said we were on the right track back then at the time. He hired Gilbride and promoted Gilbride, and of course Wilson himself has much to do with it the same way that Dan Snyder does with the Skins poking his head in where he shouldn't be. I hate to be disagreeable (becuase I agree with some of what you say), but I think Gilbride gets sort of overly maligned here. I won't say he was the greatest OC ever, but the guy has been the OC for some very productive offenses in the NFL. When he was hired, he was a "name" guy who had a decent NFL track record. There was a time in the late 80's through the late 1990's when Gilbride was pretty highly regarded by most, other than Buddy Ryan. You could also argue that the Fairchild hire was considered by many, as a "smart move" at the time. Sometimes the coach just doesn't match the talent. Remember how bad the offense was in Buffalo, when Marv hired Dan Henning? Henning was loathed by Bills fans. Henning has had a pretty damn good career by most standards. He was hanidcapped by a lousy QB...
krazykat Posted July 31, 2008 Author Posted July 31, 2008 I hate to be disagreeable (becuase I agree with some of what you say), but I think Gilbride gets sort of overly maligned here. I won't say he was the greatest OC ever, but the guy has been the OC for some very productive offenses in the NFL. When he was hired, he was a "name" guy who had a decent NFL track record. There was a time in the late 80's through the late 1990's when Gilbride was pretty highly regarded by most, other than Buddy Ryan. You could also argue that the Fairchild hire was considered by many, as a "smart move" at the time. Sometimes the coach just doesn't match the talent. Remember how bad the offense was in Buffalo, when Marv hired Dan Henning? Henning was loathed by Bills fans. Henning has had a pretty damn good career by most standards. He was hanidcapped by a lousy QB... Gilbride was the guy that Buddy Ryan, his own DC, slugged on the sidelines in Houston. Do you remember/know why? He's always been pass happy even when he's had better running games than QBs/passing games. He prefers to throw. His history as an OC hasn't been great. He was a terrible head coach as brief as that stint was. On the Giants he's only been a QB coach and look at Eli's development. The entire league was ready to throw him under the bus until about week 10 or 12 last year. With the talent Eli's had there he should have been further along quicker. And we'll see if his play late in the season was an aberration or the real mccoy. And feel free to be disagreeable all you want. I have no problems with it as long as you just state your positions and don't start calling me or others names and making petty insinuations like so many here who obviously have issues when people don't join the street gang that they've created.
BuffOrange Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 Continuity for continuity's sake does no one any good if the HC, QB, whatever is not good at what they do. Each position, each coach, each player should be given enough rope to either establish themselves as "the answer" or enough rope to hang themselves. Sticking with losers just because change is tough is a cop-out, and is just as harmful as making changing for changes sake. Not sure krazykat deserves the troll-hate he's getting, but I agree w/ this completely. Disagree w/ this theory that the Bills give their young guys less time to develop than the average team. I mean yah, Terry Bradshaw was given a while but in the modern era that just doesn't happen anymore. Those that are patient are "rewarded" with a David Carr much more frequently than the often-cited Drew Brees. If Alex Smith doesn't get it done this year, there is zero chance he's playing opening day 2009 and only a slightly better chance he finishes '08.
spartacus Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 Not sure krazykat deserves the troll-hate he's getting, but I agree w/ this completely. Disagree w/ this theory that the Bills give their young guys less time to develop than the average team. I mean yah, Terry Bradshaw was given a while but in the modern era that just doesn't happen anymore. Those that are patient are "rewarded" with a David Carr much more frequently than the often-cited Drew Brees. If Alex Smith doesn't get it done this year, there is zero chance he's playing opening day 2009 and only a slightly better chance he finishes '08. Smith may not even make it to opening day 2008 JT O'sullivan may have passed him since he has history with Martz's offense
1billsfan Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 I think it has more to do with switching coaches every few years. Wanna talk about continuity? Start there. Maybe it's who they hired and not when they were fired or quit. I'm talking about Williams, Malarkey and now the "lovable" loser Dick Jauron. If we had kept Williams and Malarkey for the long haul do you honestly believe that this team would have reaped the benefits with playoff appearances and a shot at the big dance? I know that many here think that Jauron will turn this thing around eventually if given an extended stay here. I don't believe this because I go on the theory that if you've been a head coach for longer than six or seven years that you are what your record says you are. In my book, he's a failure as a head coach and that isn't going to change with a eighth, ninth or tenth season at the helm. Williams and Malarkey were colossal failures and them sticking around would not have changed the Bills fortunes. Jauron obviously has at least one more season to show he has what it takes. If the Bills have yet another long vapid losing season the Bills would be fools to keep the eight time loser as a head coach for yet another go round.
The Big Cat Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 Maybe it's who they hired and not when they were fired or quit. I'm talking about Williams, Malarkey and now the "lovable" loser Dick Jauron. If we had kept Williams and Malarkey for the long haul do you honestly believe that this team would have reaped the benefits with playoff appearances and a shot at the big dance? I know that many here think that Jauron will turn this thing around eventually if given an extended stay here. I don't believe this because I go on the theory that if you've been a head coach for longer than six or seven years that you are what your record says you are. In my book, he's a failure as a head coach and that isn't going to change with a eighth, ninth or tenth season at the helm. Williams and Malarkey were colossal failures and them sticking around would not have changed the Bills fortunes. Jauron obviously has at least one more season to show he has what it takes. If the Bills have yet another long vapid losing season the Bills would be fools to keep the eight time loser as a head coach for yet another go round. And yet people like you ignore the fact that Bellicheat and Jauron have virtually the same record after their first five years of head coaching.
WellDressed Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 Just wondering, how many of my hot teeth hit your ugly mug?? I am under the distinct impression you bend over well.
1billsfan Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 And yet people like you ignore the fact that Bellicheat and Jauron have virtually the same record after their first five years of head coaching. So you're suggesting that Jauron just start cheating? Seriously, I think that Jauron has zero skills in making critical adjustments. Belichick learned long ago that it's not good not stick with something that's not working. Dick either let Fairchild alone or had a major roll in that putridly predictable and historically bad offense last year. Either way it's bad coaching. The lack of change in tactic was inexcusable and unfortunately very much par for the course for a Jauron led team. But for those that think he's going to be the next Belichick, when does the winning start to kick in? This year? His ninth? Tenth season as an NFL head coach?
BuffOrange Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 So you're suggesting that Jauron just start cheating? Seriously, I think that Jauron has zero skills in making critical adjustments. Belichick learned long ago that it's not good not stick with something that's not working. Dick either let Fairchild alone or had a major roll in that putridly predictable and historically bad offense last year. Either way it's bad coaching. The lack of change in tactic was inexcusable and unfortunately very much par for the course for a Jauron led team. But for those that think he's going to be the next Belichick, when does the winning start to kick in? This year? His ninth? Tenth season as an NFL head coach? There's that; plus the fact that for every Belichick, there are many more Rich Kotites and Dom Capers' (but nobody ever brings that up). I mean I actually kinda like Jauron, but - as much grief as Mike Schopp takes around here I agree w/ him here - I don't know how you can expect to win a championship with a coach capable of making a tactical error as egregious as the Dallas game (ie believing that a hail marry was more likely than a short out pattern). To me that was worse than any single decision Mularkey ever made and on par with Gregg Williams punting on 4th&2 from the Pats' 32 trailing 17-3.
nero47 Posted August 1, 2008 Posted August 1, 2008 And yet people like you ignore the fact that Bellicheat and Jauron have virtually the same record after their first five years of head coaching.MARV'S Record was also dismal until he had all the right pieces.
Adam Posted August 2, 2008 Posted August 2, 2008 Gilbride was the guy that Buddy Ryan, his own DC, slugged on the sidelines in Houston. Do you remember/know why? He's always been pass happy even when he's had better running games than QBs/passing games. He prefers to throw. His history as an OC hasn't been great. He was a terrible head coach as brief as that stint was. On the Giants he's only been a QB coach and look at Eli's development. The entire league was ready to throw him under the bus until about week 10 or 12 last year. With the talent Eli's had there he should have been further along quicker. And we'll see if his play late in the season was an aberration or the real mccoy. And feel free to be disagreeable all you want. I have no problems with it as long as you just state your positions and don't start calling me or others names and making petty insinuations like so many here who obviously have issues when people don't join the street gang that they've created. It was more than being pass happy. Killdrive runs a terrible system, in which all of the skill position players have to make a read of the defense, and that determines the routes and QB progressions. One difference in a read between the QB and WR can result in a turnover. Killdrive is terrible Maybe it's who they hired and not when they were fired or quit. I'm talking about Williams, Malarkey and now the "lovable" loser Dick Jauron. If we had kept Williams and Malarkey for the long haul do you honestly believe that this team would have reaped the benefits with playoff appearances and a shot at the big dance? I know that many here think that Jauron will turn this thing around eventually if given an extended stay here. I don't believe this because I go on the theory that if you've been a head coach for longer than six or seven years that you are what your record says you are. In my book, he's a failure as a head coach and that isn't going to change with a eighth, ninth or tenth season at the helm. Williams and Malarkey were colossal failures and them sticking around would not have changed the Bills fortunes. Jauron obviously has at least one more season to show he has what it takes. If the Bills have yet another long vapid losing season the Bills would be fools to keep the eight time loser as a head coach for yet another go round. Mularkey was a disaster from the start- I hated him from the word go. Williams made some rookie coach mistakes, but I think he could have developed into a good coach. He had one year with Rob Johnson at QB and an offensive line so horrible that we ended up taking "Super bust" Mike Williams. He also had no kicker that year either. Then his reputation was further damaged when our savior at QB which we traded a 1st round pick for turned out to be nothing more than a journeyman who was pretty good. We had an offense that year, but then TD got rid of Price, Centers and Riemersma. I think with a front office that wasn't trying to be everything to everyone that Williams would have eventually settled down and stopped trying to be every coach he ever worked under and would have been ok. As far as Jauron, give him an established QB, a solid line on offense and defense and then if he can't win....fine, move on. Change is fine, and if its Jauron, then thank him for the effort and move on. Its just important to isolate the problem before just getting rid of the coach and QB and starting over again with the same problems. It all starts with a vision up top. And it appears that vision is a ball control offense and a defense that is strong up the middle- not just on the line.
San-O Posted August 2, 2008 Posted August 2, 2008 There's that; plus the fact that for every Belichick, there are many more Rich Kotites and Dom Capers' (but nobody ever brings that up).I mean I actually kinda like Jauron, but - as much grief as Mike Schopp takes around here I agree w/ him here - I don't know how you can expect to win a championship with a coach capable of making a tactical error as egregious as the Dallas game (ie believing that a hail marry was more likely than a short out pattern). To me that was worse than any single decision Mularkey ever made and on par with Gregg Williams punting on 4th&2 from the Pats' 32 trailing 17-3. I still recall all the B.S. explanations and spin he came up with when addressing the press after that game. All the crap statements he kept coming up with made it even more ridiculous: Is it my imagination, or did he actually say something like they "discussed" that strategy before the 2nd half? What a jackass.
Recommended Posts