thewildrabbit Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Not for nothing, but I don't blame Jauron for stacking the secondary with Tom Brady and Randy Moss in the AFC East. I know its been mentioned already but Jauron is probably still shell shocked from all the Injuries last season, the Bills actually had walkons off the street on the field at times they were so desperate.
Bill from NYC Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 If you think the front 7 of this team was strong in 2005, you are living in a dream, Bill. The Bills D was ranked 29 in total defense in 2005, 29th in total yards, 24th in points allowed, 31st in rushing yards (what a strong front 7) and 19th in passing yards. The Bills D, in 2008, after it's DEVASTATION by Levy and Jauron ranked 14 in total defense, 14th in total yards, 14th in points allowed, 22 in rushing yards and 13th in passing yards. Your problem is you refuse to consider just how bad the team was that Levy took over. They were bad and old. The team that Levy took over was obviously horrible. They did however have a ton of cap space. This is one area in which I praise Donahoe. Remember, TD had to use 10 million or so in cap space just to cut Fina and Ostroski. They also had a #8, and in a good trade (credit where it'd due), two extra 3rd round picks. Give the above to real football people (in terms of GM, scouting, etc.) and they are going to build you a football team. Teams are improving across the country while we flounder. Teams build for thir surroundings, while we stockpile small defensive backs to play outdoors in Orchard Park, Foxboro and the Swamp. It failed, and it will keep on failing because of Jauron. The ugly truth is that Marv hired him and Ralph kept him. It is all but hopeless. I won't give up because I am into the scene, but yes, Levy was instrumental in taking this team down the tubes and keeping it there. There was no reason to hire an inexperienced 80 year old GM. It was idiocy. Who else would do this other than Ralph? Stats mean zero when the football players on your favorite team are getting the snot beat out of them, and your earliest draft picks are little people who play 30 yards away from the football. And Brian, I have enough games with you to be sure that I am not telling you anything you didn't already know.
The Dean Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 The team that Levy took over was abviously horrible. They did however have a ton of cap space. This is one area in which I praise Donahoe. Remember, TD had to use 10 million or so in cap space just to cut Fina and Ostroski. They also had a #8, and in a good trade (credit where it'd due), two extra 3rd round picks. Give the above to real football people (in terms of GM, scouting, etc.) and they are going to build you a football team. Teams are improving across the country while we flounder. Teams build for thir surroundings, while we stockpile small defensive backs to play outdoors in Orchard Park, Foxboro and the Swamp. It failed, and it will keep on failing because of Jauron. The ugly truth is that Marv hired him and Ralph kept him. It is all but hopeless. I won't give up because I am into the scene, but yes, Levy was instrumental in taking this team down the tubes and keeping it there. There was no reason to hire an inexperienced 80 year old GM. It was idiocy. Who else would do this other than Ralph? Stats mean zero when the football players on your favorite team are getting the snot neat out of them, and your earliest draft picks are little people who play 30 yards away from the football. And Brian, I have enough games with you to be sure that I am not telling you anything you didn't already know. Again, you say things, but provide no context, nor have you addressed most of the points I have already made. The thing you seem to go out of your way to avoid, in this most recent post, is the Bills' cash-to-cap philosophy. As you note, the Bills weren't at the cap with TD, nor were they with Levy, nor are they now. To criticize Levy for not being able to do something that no Bills GM has been able to do (spend what other teams spend), since Butler, is simply unconscionable. Yes, Levy missed with a very few picks, but EVERY GM, or pseudo misses with picks. In truth, the number of picks in from the 2006 and 2007 drafts that start, or make significant contributions to the Bills, speaks for itself. The fact that the team went from needing a starter (or multiple starters) at nearly every position to needing a C, TE, DE and help at DT and LB, speaks for itself. Almost EVERY unit on this team is better off than it was in 2005, yet you still refuse to give credit where it is due. I have to agree that Marv's worst decision was hiring Jauron. There are certainly reasons why, at the time, it probably seemed like a good safe hire, and a way to build back to respectability, while at the same time rebuilding a horribly ravaged team. But, as we have seen, Dick is too conservative at his core, and inept when he attempts to be "creative".
BillsVet Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 How do you explain the Bills having a better record (despite very poor coaching) and better defensive rankings in most every defensive category, if the FO decimated this team, from where they took it over? It's convenient that you selected 2005 as a comparison to this year for an illustration of "progress." Starting with a low point in Bills history certainly makes the case that 2008 wasn't that bad. A closer inspection shows huge issues with that theory. Buffalo's strength of schedule was 31st in the NFL in 08, and lost to the team with the easiest schedule: SF. They finished the season 2-8, which is probably on par with how bad 2005 was. I personally don't care for how the team ranks in yards gained or allowed if the record stinks. To think a team could start 5-1 and finish 7-9 is a catastrophic collapse. It's no better than the 5-11 from Donahoe's last season. I recall after 2006 that this board was talking about "progress." There has been zero progress since 2005, and I daresay the fans are at a point where they were a little over three years ago.
keepthefaith Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 It's convenient that you selected 2005 as a comparison to this year for an illustration of "progress." Starting with a low point in Bills history certainly makes the case that 2008 wasn't that bad. A closer inspection shows huge issues with that theory. Buffalo's strength of schedule was 31st in the NFL in 08, and lost to the team with the easiest schedule: SF. They finished the season 2-8, which is probably on par with how bad 2005 was. I personally don't care for how the team ranks in yards gained or allowed if the record stinks. To think a team could start 5-1 and finish 7-9 is a catastrophic collapse. It's no better than the 5-11 from Donahoe's last season. I recall after 2006 that this board was talking about "progress." There has been zero progress since 2005, and I daresay the fans are at a point where they were a little over three years ago. Agree, the roster makeover has done nothing and the coaching has not been improved and that's what the results say. It appears that Ralph has decided to wait another year before he makes any moves. If he can take a year off, so can the fans.
The Dean Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 It's convenient that you selected 2005 as a comparison to this year for an illustration of "progress." I didn't simply select 2005 as the point of comparison. That is the team that Marv inherited. :thumbsup:
thewildrabbit Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 The team that Levy took over was abviously horrible. They did however have a ton of cap space. This is one area in which I praise Donahoe. Remember, TD had to use 10 million or so in cap space just to cut Fina and Ostroski. They also had a #8, and in a good trade (credit where it'd due), two extra 3rd round picks. Give the above to real football people (in terms of GM, scouting, etc.) and they are going to build you a football team. Teams are improving across the country while we flounder. Teams build for thir surroundings, while we stockpile small defensive backs to play outdoors in Orchard Park, Foxboro and the Swamp. It failed, and it will keep on failing because of Jauron. The ugly truth is that Marv hired him and Ralph kept him. It is all but hopeless. I won't give up because I am into the scene, but yes, Levy was instrumental in taking this team down the tubes and keeping it there. There was no reason to hire an inexperienced 80 year old GM. It was idiocy. Who else would do this other than Ralph? Stats mean zero when the football players on your favorite team are getting the snot neat out of them, and your earliest draft picks are little people who play 30 yards away from the football. And Brian, I have enough games with you to be sure that I am not telling you anything you didn't already know. It wasn't Idiocy,go look at the season ticket sales the last few years that Marv levy managed to generate, what is idiocy is keeping Jauron. Though I can almost understand Ralph Wilson keeping him considering the way the economy is in its current state.There is almost enough talent on this current Bills team to win if the team can make some correct moves in the off season and change the offensive philosophy from constant shotgun to play action passing and run to set up the pass.
DrFishfinder Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 I think Trent has some potential, but he needs to start developing the courage to make the tough throw, instead of always taking the easy dump off. Of course, the coahes could help him more by calling a competent game. Not to mention the receivers, by which I mean someone besides Reed, getting separation, staying with the routes to the end of the play and actually getting open. All too many times this year, I have seen receivers give up on routes before the play is over. The illustrious Mr. Evans, included.
The Dean Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 Not to mention the receivers, by which I mean someone besides Reed, getting separation, staying with the routes to the end of the play and actually getting open. All too many times this year, I have seen receivers give up on routes before the play is over. The illustrious Mr. Evans, included. I think that "giving up" you see, is simply a sense that the play is over for them. Good QBs, in the right system, don't wait for "separation". Trent can't wait until a guy is wide open to throw the ball...that's the problem. If he were throwing the ball, in anticipation, and throwing it well, guys like Evans find a way to make the catch. Of course, his completion percentage would go down, a little, and he might throw a few more INTs...but, the difference in the offensive efficiency would more than make up for it.
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 I think that "giving up" you see, is simply a sense that the play is over for them. Good QBs, in the right system, don't wait for "separation". Trent can't wait until a guy is wide open to throw the ball...that's the problem. If he were throwing the ball, in anticipation, and throwing it well, guys like Evans find a way to make the catch. Of course, his completion percentage would go down, a little, and he might throw a few more INTs...but, the difference in the offensive efficiency would more than make up for it. I wonder if Edwards is confused by legit pass coverage because of what he sees in practice. Specifically, we've all seen opponents going against the Bills pass defense and throwing balls to receivers that are completely uncovered. Not just open, but lonely. Without a Bills defensive player within 10 yards. If the D plays the way they practice, then Edwards may very well see his receivers completely wide open and not have to anticipate or force the ball in narrow, closing windows. From all that speculation, we could further speculate that Edwards' troubles when teams drop 8 might stand to reason as the wide open looks disappear and without the anticipation, he just holds the ball vainly trying to find a lonely receiver that isn't there. Pure speculation, obviously...
DrFishfinder Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 I have to agree that Marv's worst decision was hiring Jauron. There are certainly reasons why, at the time, it probably seemed like a good safe hire, and a way to build back to respectability, while at the same time rebuilding a horribly ravaged team. But, as we have seen, Dick is too conservative at his core, and inept when he attempts to be "creative". Couldn't agree more. Wonder what Marv would say (or has said) about Jauron now. Certain players have said that Jauron has them ready to play and well coached, that they are the ones who aren't executing. Could be a valid point, but still does not let Jauron off the hook for the numerous gaffes, however.
DrFishfinder Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 I think that "giving up" you see, is simply a sense that the play is over for them. Good QBs, in the right system, don't wait for "separation". Trent can't wait until a guy is wide open to throw the ball...that's the problem. If he were throwing the ball, in anticipation, and throwing it well, guys like Evans find a way to make the catch. Of course, his completion percentage would go down, a little, and he might throw a few more INTs...but, the difference in the offensive efficiency would more than make up for it. Good receivers shouldn't do that. Agreed about good QB's and separation. Evans seems gun-shy in that respect. That may be an ingrained habit that could be very hard to break.
bill in Livonia Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 If you can't get over it, give us a break and stop bugging us with it!
BLZFAN4LIFE Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 I wonder if Edwards is confused by legit pass coverage because of what he sees in practice. Specifically, we've all seen opponents going against the Bills pass defense and throwing balls to receivers that are completely uncovered. Not just open, but lonely. Without a Bills defensive player within 10 yards. If the D plays the way they practice, then Edwards may very well see his receivers completely wide open and not have to anticipate or force the ball in narrow, closing windows. From all that speculation, we could further speculate that Edwards' troubles when teams drop 8 might stand to reason as the wide open looks disappear and without the anticipation, he just holds the ball vainly trying to find a lonely receiver that isn't there. Pure speculation, obviously... That's a very good point. If Trent only practices against Dick's soft cover none, that would explain why Trent is hesitant to trust his receivers on intermediate to deep routes. A perfect example of Dick Jauron thwarting a players potential. Good observation.
BillsVet Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 I didn't simply select 2005 as the point of comparison. That is the team that Marv inherited. :thumbsup: TD's final season was an abject disaster. 2008, especially with that start, was also a failure. Levy/Jauron moved this team from plain bad to mediocre, and it only took about 1-2 seasons. Now Buffalo is in the mediocre lane on the highway to ten straight non-playoff seasons. I really don't see what they've done so well. Unless there is a four year rebuild plan, which I doubt was the initial plan, they Levy and ultimately the front office failed. All they've done is changed the roster over, but the results are strangely similar. TDs last three years were 20-28. The Jauron era is 21-27. The more things change...
The Dean Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 TD's final season was an abject disaster. 2008, especially with that start, was also a failure. Levy/Jauron moved this team from plain bad to mediocre, and it only took about 1-2 seasons. Now Buffalo is in the mediocre lane on the highway to ten straight non-playoff seasons. I really don't see what they've done so well. Unless there is a four year rebuild plan, which I doubt was the initial plan, they Levy and ultimately the front office failed. All they've done is changed the roster over, but the results are strangely similar. TDs last three years were 20-28. The Jauron era is 21-27. The more things change... Again, look at the roster. I did a unit-by-unit analysis, and got no rebuttals. This team has more talent than the team in 2005...and it isn't really that close.
Beerball Posted January 10, 2009 Posted January 10, 2009 I know its been mentioned already but Jauron is probably still shell shocked from all the Injuries last season, the Bills actually had walkons off the street on the field at times they were so desperate. How long do you think the shell shock will last? We're 12 months removed from the 2007 season. Not sure if I've seen a sorrier excuse for Jauron's ineptitude.
BADOLBILZ Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 How do you explain the Bills having a better record (despite very poor coaching) and better defensive rankings in most every defensive category, if the FO decimated this team, from where they took it over? Regarding those DB's, they've regressed in pass defense since ranking 7th in 2006. If you're arguing based on defensive rankings this is the end of the argument. Finito. You see, the team that Levy inherited wasn't as bad as many of you make it out to be. They were certainly NOT 4 years away from being a winning team. The reason why their roster is still short is because the FO chose to rebuild things that weren't broken in a failed attempt to create a situation where team success would exceed the level of talent. Synergy! Releasing Milloy and then using a #1 pick to replace him. Using another #1 pick on a RB the following year. Letting Fletcher walk and using two first day picks to draft Poz who is not as good a fit in cover 2 as Fletcher, who is still playing good football. Letting Clements walk and having to use their NEXT #1 on McKelvin. Sheesh. THEY HAVEN'T ADDRESSED A SINGLE POSITION WITH THEIR FIRST PICK, IN THREE FULL YEARS, THAT WAS A WEAKNESS WHEN LEVY TOOK OVER. That's why THEY have a shortage of personnel. They have been treading water. The problem I have with Jauron is that the reason these vets were let leave was to presumably create some kind of addition by subtraction. Which never frickin' happened, which means they F'd the hell up! And now they can use their own failures to greatly improve the roster as a defense to save their jobs. It's a crazy clusterf*ck of bad decisions that beget more bad decisions. And the sad thing is, it really wouldn't be that hard to right this thing because they may now very well have a capable NFL QB by virtue of hitting on a late 3rd round pick. A great coach and just one offseason worth of personnel improvement and this team could be a serious contender for a number of years. But to me, the worst part of it all is that if the Bills somehow manage to go 8-8 or 9-7 next year it would be near impossible to justify firing Jauron yet AGAIN after investing 4 seasons in his system. It made no sense to want continuity when there was no reason to EXPECT that it would yield results. He's a loser 7 times out of 8. An overeducated slow blinker who makes too many bad decisions to win big playing conservative football and not sharp enough to win AT ALL playing any other way. All giving him more talent will do is give him a chance to do less with more.
thewildrabbit Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 Not for nothing, but I don't blame Jauron for stacking the secondary with Tom Brady and Randy Moss in the AFC East. I know its been mentioned already but Jauron is probably still shell shocked from all the Injuries last season, the Bills actually had walkons off the street on the field at times they were so desperate. How long do you think the shell shock will last? We're 12 months removed from the 2007 season. Not sure if I've seen a sorrier excuse for Jauron's ineptitude. Why not quote the entire post ? Perhaps Brady to Moss doesn't mean much to you ...considering the Bills faced the NFL's most prolific passing offense 2x a year. Dunno, maybe the 56-10 and 38-7 losses to a team that went undefeated in 07 mean nothing to someone of your stature,have another
BillsVet Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 Again, look at the roster. I did a unit-by-unit analysis, and got no rebuttals. This team has more talent than the team in 2005...and it isn't really that close. Roster talent means nothing when the coaching is so bad and the results stink to high heaven. It's a cop out to say the talent is better. That's like saying they have potential. It all means nothing and avoids addressing the central theme from this year: the players have no heart. A talented roster with no desire is worse than a bad roster with heart and determination. The only thing that matters is the final record. Not yards allowed or gained, turnover difference, penalties, nothing. Only record. I'd argue Buffalo has more "roster talent" than Miami. Yet one team couldn't do anything in the final 10 games of the season and self-destructed. The other made the playoffs with glaring weaknesses all over the place.
Recommended Posts