For my beloved TSW agists:

[The Big Cat]

There was some liberty, but the concept was the same. As another poster said (to paraphrase) there are a lot of intelligent people that have under achieved.

Jauron was not the first, and he will not be the last.

 

 

 

First, the players do not hold all the bargaining power. Jason Peters is a case in point. How much bargaining power did he have?

 

As for the rest of that paragraph, welcome to America and to capitalism.

It's the employees that are responsible for generating the revenue of a company, because it it the employees that create the product or provide the service.

 

Unfortunately, that is also not totally true. And it's the same way in football.

I'll spare the bandwidth and the space, and not go into a whole scenario as to why, but just know that ultimately, the HC is held accountable in the same way mid level managers are held accountable in a company.

When the team is not performing well, the owner is not going to call the players in and find out why they are not meeting expectations. That's why he hired coaches. It is their job to get the players to meet expectations. It is the coaches he will hold accountable for the failure.

 

All accountability falls on the coaches because it is all their decisions that has put them where they are.

The players did not decide to become younger as a team. The coaches made that decision.

The players did not decide to switch to the Tampa 2 defense, the coaches did.

The players did not decide to stop/start blitzing, the coaches did.

 

Ok, what about execution. The coaches made a decision regarding a scheme, and the players failed to execute it during the game.

If it is one or two players, it is the players fault. If it's a group of players, that is usually an indicator of a bad decision.

And who is held accountable for the decisions? The coaches.

 

 

 

I can. In fact, I suggest you spend some time researching Marty Shottenheimer, and his days coaching the Cleveland Browns and Kansas City Chiefs. His teams consistently ranked near the top of league every year in takeaway/turnover ratio.

That's due to his emphasis on those concepts.

In other words, that is something that can be coached into a team.

 

 

 

And therein lies the great fallacy. As I pointed out in your post, you provide no such evidence.

In fact, regarding all Jauron supporters, this is a common issue.

 

They never provide facts as to why he is good. They make assumptions. They provide excuses. But no evidence.

 

The biggest assumption made is he's "a good coach". This assumption drives every Jauron supporter to find the "reason" (a/k/a excuse) he has yet to live up to that expectation. Amazingly enough, not a single "reason" points to Jauron.

 

Fact: Jauron posted a losing record in Chicago.

Supporters: the "GM" was out to get him, he had crappy teams, he had no QB

 

Fact: Jauron has posted a losing record while being the HC of the Buffalo Bills

Supporters: team was in chaos when he took over, youth, all those "injuries"

 

You see what I am getting at? Not a fact in support of the argument he is a "good" coach. Just excuses of why he failed to meet expectations.

 

 

Don't even start with the "ifs". Last time I checked, there were 160+ plays during that game.

That's 160+ (plays) x n "if possibilities" (per play) that could have impacted the game.

 

You're not going to convince me that Jauron is a bad coach, I'm not on the market. As for your last part- doesn't this fly in the face of the "Jauron is to blame for the loss because we ran three times to setup a field goal" theory?

[reddogblitz]

I fall on the Jauron is not a very good coach side. Mainly because of the lack of wins. He was hired to do one thing, win football games. So far after 2 2/3 seasons he's lost 4 more than he's won.

 

Mainly, I just disagree with his coaching philosophy. I see it as play conservative on both sides of the ball. Keep it close and try to win at the end. I'm just not sure how successful that approach can be. Your team will always make some mistakes along the way (see Monday's missed FG) or when playing teams like the Patisies or Drugboys, ref calls will go against you late (see defensive holding on Stroud late in the Patsies game). I also think he makes poor game time decisions (see not challenging the Welker "catch" against the Patsies or not trying to move in for a closer FG against the Clowns). There are many more.

 

He does get players ready to play and they play hard for him. The team played well enough to win that game, but bad decision making and playing too conservative took it away from us.

 

I wish the Bills success with Coach Jauron at the helm, but have my doubts.

 

Go BILLS !!

[Cynical]

You're not going to convince me that Jauron is a bad coach, I'm not on the market.

 

You can view it however you want to. I was just pointing out the very flaw of the Jauron supporters premise. Assumptions are only valid if all parties are willing to accept the assumption as a fact.

In Jauron's case, not everybody agrees with the supporters assumption of "Dick Jauron is good coach". In fact, that assumption is the very basis of the disagreement.

 

As for your last part- doesn't this fly in the face of the "Jauron is to blame for the loss because we ran three times to setup a field goal" theory?

 

Uh, no. The game was lost. There is no "if" about it.

The complaints I have read are blaming Jauron for NOT taking a CHANCE to get better field position.

Nobody is assuming the pass play would have worked, and/or Lindell would have made the FG.

 

That is NOT the same as saying if the Bills did not turn the ball over, they would have won the game.

You have no way of proving that.

If the Bills did not turn the ball over, would that have increased their chances of winning? Yes, but increasing their chances does not mean they would have won.