What made you think that 7-9 was underachieving?

[SouthGeorgiaBillsFan]

I've hinted at this in several threads previously but I decided it deserved its own thread. The question is in respect to the continuing criticism of the coaching staff - so what exactly made you guys expect to win more than seven games in each of the previous seasons? To my sensibilities, 7-9 seemed like overachieving when I looked at the teams on paper, and thus I have no complaints with our current coaching situation. Personally I could care less what someone's coaching style is as long as the results speak for themselves, and in regards to the DJ situation it just seems like given the personnel he has to work with, he has far exceeded reasonable expectations. So I ask again - did I miss the boat on why the Bills *should* have won 9 or 10 games in any of those season, or even 7? Because I certainly didn't see any awe inspiring levels of talent on those teams.

[KD in CA]

For me it's less about the talent base and more about the mind boggling decision making when it comes to playcalling and game/clock management.

 

The games against the Jets, Clev and SF could have all been wins. And the debacle at the end of the half against the Pats* was just the icing on the cake for this inept coaching staff.

[GG]

For me it's less about the talent base and more about the mind boggling decision making when it comes to playcalling and game/clock management.

 

The games against the Jets, Clev and SF should have all been wins. And the debacle at the end of the half against the Pats* was just the icing on the cake for this inept coaching staff.

 

Minor typo in your post.

[Dante]

For me it's less about the talent base and more about the mind boggling decision making when it comes to playcalling and game/clock management.

 

The games against the Jets, Clev and SF could have all been wins. And the debacle at the end of the half against the Pats* was just the icing on the cake for this inept coaching staff.

All beatable, lower end teams even by the worst in the league. Makes it even more unacceptable.

[SouthGeorgiaBillsFan]

For me it's less about the talent base and more about the mind boggling decision making when it comes to playcalling and game/clock management.

 

The games against the Jets, Clev and SF could have all been wins. And the debacle at the end of the half against the Pats* was just the icing on the cake for this inept coaching staff.

 

Every game *could* have been wins. At what point does the onus of responsibility fall on the players? That is my point. If we had made more plays, the game wouldn't have been in the hands of the "inept coaching staff" to begin with. Perhaps they don't air it out at the end of a half because they didn't have any weapons to air it out too...I mean seriously double coverage vs Lee Evans = shut down every time, and half-assed single coverage on everyone else = shut down every time...so where did these unreasonable expectations for aggressive play calling come from?

 

The logic here doesn't make any sense. On the other hand, until you can be up by 2-3 scores late in the game, it makes perfect sense to play to win on a last second FG. Can someone justify the reasoning behind the continuing complaints with any argument that has more substance than "we should have won game X"?

[SouthGeorgiaBillsFan]

All beatable, lower end teams even by the worst in the league. Makes it even more unacceptable.

 

And you don't think the Bills were also in that category? How many other teams (besides the Lions, obviously, and we really don't want to use them for comparative purposes here do we?) went win-less in their divisions? You can't do that by accident and by a few questionable calls at the end of a blown open half. It requires a supremely underwhelming roster of players to be that consistently bad, and knowing the Bills roster, I don't blame anyone for a conservative game plan.

 

I mean I can easily counter the logic that "we should have beat the bad teams" by saying "we should have never had to come from behind at the end of the game against the bad teams *unless* we also were bad..."

 

Look we all like to think Belichick is the phenomenal genius mastermind...but he used to coach the Browns, and guess what, they were BAD. The point being that even the greatest coach of our time couldn't be successful without talented players, so why should we expect that from DJ?

 

This is the first year he has had even a decent amount of talent to work with. Let's at least give him the benefit of the doubt - especially considering the move to acquire T.O. and implementation of the no-huddle seem to signal a change in the mentality of the staff, and it stands to reason that it will signal a change in the basic philosophy we see week in and week out as the coaching staff becomes more and more confident with their players' abilities.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Dick Jauron did say that the playoffs were the goal last August.

[Justice]

Simple answer here. We started out 5 & 1, that's why.

[SouthGeorgiaBillsFan]

Dick Jauron did say that the playoffs were the goal last August.

 

Is there any team in the NFL who doesn't aspire to get to the playoffs and then beyond? I mean what do you expect him to say in a press conference?

 

"Well football is a difficult game, and it is hard to win in the NFL. But that issue is compounded exponentially by the fact that our entire football team sucks, so the playoffs are an unrealistic expectation for this season."

 

Yea I can see that going over well.

 

Simple answer here. We started out 5 & 1, that's why.

 

Yea. 5-1 before teams realized that the lack of depth and talent on the Bills roster could be exploited by bracketing Lee Evans and stacking 8 guys in the box. Once teams started doing that, we started losing. Why? Because we lacked the talent to exploit that defensive scheme. Not to mention that other than the Chargers game, those teams we beat were bad teams and already depleted by injuries...Did you really think after 5-1 that we were going to win the east or topple the Colts/Steelers?

[Lofton80]

I am pretty sure most wins in the NFL are not by 2 or 3 touchdowns but rather decided by 7 points or less where coaching decisions make a difference. The last second FG attempt vs a terrible Cleveland team that fired its coach was a settled for long FG when we had a first down and time to get closer. I am not sure how such a decision that failed would make perfect sense. Losing to a SF team that also fired its coach, used its 3rd QB beat Buffalo at home when they hardly had any first downs. I am pretty sure it was a coaching decision that had JP Losman rolling out against the Jets when the game was won. I simply don't get your logic.

 

The logic here doesn't make any sense. On the other hand, until you can be up by 2-3 scores late in the game, it makes perfect sense to play to win on a last second FG. Can someone justify the reasoning behind the continuing complaints with any argument that has more substance than "we should have won game X"?

[GG]

Every game *could* have been wins. At what point does the onus of responsibility fall on the players? That is my point. If we had made more plays, the game wouldn't have been in the hands of the "inept coaching staff" to begin with. Perhaps they don't air it out at the end of a half because they didn't have any weapons to air it out too...I mean seriously double coverage vs Lee Evans = shut down every time, and half-assed single coverage on everyone else = shut down every time...so where did these unreasonable expectations for aggressive play calling come from?

 

The logic here doesn't make any sense. On the other hand, until you can be up by 2-3 scores late in the game, it makes perfect sense to play to win on a last second FG. Can someone justify the reasoning behind the continuing complaints with any argument that has more substance than "we should have won game X"?

 

A hallmark of a very good manager in any industry is his ability to play to his subordinates' strength and minimize their weaknesses, because very rarely does a manager have a roster of superstars at his command. A good manager's plan and detail to executing that plan will, more often than not, lead to superior results.

 

Using that as a base to analyze those 3 games that should have been won, we see a coaching staff that was playing up the the players' weaknesses, even though it may have been the right thing to do on paper. Cleveland, it was settling for a 52 yd westward FG, SF it was being content with FG tries, NYJ it was putting the game in the hands of your most erratic player.

 

Those are just the obvious examples. If you look at each game, you will find numerous points of basic game mismanagement that means the difference in field position, game clock management and killed drives that were not the result of players not executing. So, when nearly every game can be decided by a one-play swing, it doesn't help when your coaching staff isn't prepared for the game.

[Ramius]

A hallmark of a very good manager in any industry is his ability to play to his subordinates' strength and minimize their weaknesses, because very rarely does a manager have a roster of superstars at his command. A good manager's plan and detail to executing that plan will, more often than not, lead to superior results.

 

Using that as a base to analyze those 3 games that should have been won, we see a coaching staff that was playing up the the players' weaknesses, even though it may have been the right thing to do on paper. Cleveland, it was settling for a 52 yd westward FG, SF it was being content with FG tries, NYJ it was putting the game in the hands of your most erratic player.

 

Those are just the obvious examples. If you look at each game, you will find numerous points of basic game mismanagement that means the difference in field position, game clock management and killed drives that were not the result of players not executing. So, when nearly every game can be decided by a one-play swing, it doesn't help when your coaching staff isn't prepared for the game.

 

Not to mention in the SF game, you have the absolutely mind boggling decision to give your RB (who is averaging 9+ YPC) exactly 1 carry in the final 20-25 minutes of a 1 score game. But i guess that's somehow the players' fault.

[Justice]

I am pretty sure most wins in the NFL are not by 2 or 3 touchdowns but rather decided by 7 points or less where coaching decisions make a difference. The last second FG attempt vs a terrible Cleveland team that fired its coach was a settled for long FG when we had a first down and time to get closer. I am not sure how such a decision that failed would make perfect sense. Losing to a SF team that also fired its coach, used its 3rd QB beat Buffalo at home when they hardly had any first downs. I am pretty sure it was a coaching decision that had JP Losman rolling out against the Jets when the game was won. I simply don't get your logic.

 

The logic here doesn't make any sense. On the other hand, until you can be up by 2-3 scores late in the game, it makes perfect sense to play to win on a last second FG. Can someone justify the reasoning behind the continuing complaints with any argument that has more substance than "we should have won game X"?

 

 

 

You're right on the money with this post. I'll take it a step further. I don't disagree with DJ's decision to run the ball against the Browns three times in a row in order to stay on the safe side against Cleveland preventing a int, but I do, however, disagree with which plays were called. We telegraphed the run because of the personnel we had on the field. We should've ran out of a 3 wide singleback formation. At the very least, the Browns would've had to guard against a possible pass as well and that would've helped the running game.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Is there any team in the NFL who doesn't aspire to get to the playoffs and then beyond? I mean what do you expect him to say in a press conference?

 

"Well football is a difficult game, and it is hard to win in the NFL. But that issue is compounded exponentially by the fact that our entire football team sucks, so the playoffs are an unrealistic expectation for this season."

 

Yea I can see that going over well.

You asked why anyone would think the Bills underachieved. Dick Jauron said he felt the team, in year 3 of his rebuilding project, was ready for a playoff run in 2008. They had the 2nd easiest schedule in the NFL and finished 7-9 with a 2-8 stretch run. Donte Whitner even guaranteed the Bills would make the playoffs. Why indeed? But to answer your question: no, not every coach says every year that he feels he has all the pieces in place and that his team is ready to become a playoff team. Dick did not say that his first year here. In the first year, they were rebuilding and trying to change the attitude from one of losing. Talking playoffs would have set unrealistic expectations for a team in total flux. Although the Dolphins did make the playoffs, they didn't go out and say they were a playoff ready team coming off a 1-15 season. It'd be foolish. You don't see the Lions talking about being in the playoffs this year, do you? So, yeah, there is a difference between aspiring to be successful and making a public proclamation that success is at hand.

[nero47]

I have a suggestion for this year. have the moderators set up a separate thread each week after a close loss so the coaching experts among us can explain which play we would have called to win the game or how we would have strategized the game. Then everyone would have the benefit of our incredible insights.

[SouthGeorgiaBillsFan]

I am pretty sure most wins in the NFL are not by 2 or 3 touchdowns but rather decided by 7 points or less where coaching decisions make a difference. The last second FG attempt vs a terrible Cleveland team that fired its coach was a settled for long FG when we had a first down and time to get closer. I am not sure how such a decision that failed would make perfect sense. Losing to a SF team that also fired its coach, used its 3rd QB beat Buffalo at home when they hardly had any first downs. I am pretty sure it was a coaching decision that had JP Losman rolling out against the Jets when the game was won. I simply don't get your logic.

 

The logic here doesn't make any sense. On the other hand, until you can be up by 2-3 scores late in the game, it makes perfect sense to play to win on a last second FG. Can someone justify the reasoning behind the continuing complaints with any argument that has more substance than "we should have won game X"?

 

The decision didn't fail there. The kicker did. Had the FG been made, it would be moot. Hence this enforces my point that the onus should be more on the players. Also - you are in FG range now but have 1st down and time to move the ball closer. You can't run it because that would eat up time and not stop the clock. So you are forced to throw toward the sidelines. Therefore the defense knows that a) it will be a pass, and b) it will be toward the sidelines. Considering how much trouble the Bills offense had when the D *didn't* know what was coming, how is it bad to not risk an interception when they do? You're entire argument is based on the fact that we lost - not on the fact that we were in position to win if the player(s) had executed...i.e. made the field goal.

 

Your logic = fail. I am glad that the Bills FO seems more in line with my logic, because if the team was run by the posters on this forum we would really lose a lot of games.

 

I have a suggestion for this year. have the moderators set up a separate thread each week after a close loss so the coaching experts among us can explain which play we would have called to win the game or how we would have strategized the game. Then everyone would have the benefit of our incredible insights. rolleyes.gif

 

Touche.

[C.Biscuit97]

I've hinted at this is several threads previously but I decided it deserved its own thread. The question is in respect to the continuing criticism of the coaching staff - so what exactly made you guys expect to win more than seven games in each of the previous seasons? To my sensibilities, 7-9 seemed like overachieving when I looked at the teams on paper, and thus I have no complaints with our current coaching situation. Personally I could care less what someone's coaching style is as long as the results speak for themselves, and in regards to the DJ situation it just seems like given the personnel he has to work with, he has far exceeded reasonable expectations. So I ask again - did I miss the boat on why the Bills *should* have won 9 or 10 games in any of those season, or even 7? Because I certainly didn't see any awe inspiring levels of talent on those teams.

 

 

I applaud your point though many won't agree with you. Fans' expectations are completely whacked, which is part of being a fan. Now while Jauron has his faults, I think he has done a good job with our talent base. The reign of TD and the pick of Losman are moves that set franchises back for years. Now it appears we may have lucked out with Edwards, but time will tell.

 

Outside of Bills' fan, no other football fan thought this was a team close to being a playoff contender. For some reason, some misled Bills fans thought the only reason JP Losman was not an all pro was Fairchild and Jauron. The fact that the coaching staff made Losman look somewhat like a NFL starter is a testament tot heir abilites. And the fact you can go 7-9 with a QB that 32 teams won't even invite in camp to compete for a job is signs of good coaching.

 

Face forward to the past 2 seasons, Losman put us behind the 8 ball in 2007. Given the injuries and Everett situation, 7-9 is almost amazing. This season all the pieces were falling into place before Edwards took steps backwards. There are several reasons why, but ultimately TE wasn't the same guy. Our talent level was not good enough to have Edwards been average or below average.

 

Here's the major thing: all coaches make mistakes as do the players. If you look throughout the season, people were ripping Andy Reid and Mike Tomlin for their decision making as well. however when you have superior talent (especially at the QB position), you can overcome a few mistakes.

 

So IMHO, Jauron really does deserve this season as his make or break season. I look at his coaching resume in Buffalo like this: 2006 - really good, 2007- borderline great, 2008 - a step back and disappointing. On paper (and as sad as it sounds), this is the most talented team DJ has ever coached. Time will tell but I look forward to a very good year.

[C.Biscuit97]

You asked why anyone would think the Bills underachieved. Dick Jauron said he felt the team, in year 3 of his rebuilding project, was ready for a playoff run in 2008. They had the 2nd easiest schedule in the NFL and finished 7-9 with a 2-8 stretch run. Donte Whitner even guaranteed the Bills would make the playoffs. Why indeed? But to answer your question: no, not every coach says every year that he feels he has all the pieces in place and that his team is ready to become a playoff team. Dick did not say that his first year here. In the first year, they were rebuilding and trying to change the attitude from one of losing. Talking playoffs would have set unrealistic expectations for a team in total flux. Although the Dolphins did make the playoffs, they didn't go out and say they were a playoff ready team coming off a 1-15 season. It'd be foolish. You don't see the Lions talking about being in the playoffs this year, do you? So, yeah, there is a difference between aspiring to be successful and making a public proclamation that success is at hand.

 

 

Schedule strength is one of the dumbest arguments there is. This is the pros, not college. There are no easy games and it's silly to think that. Or else the Fins won't beat a dominant Super Bowl Pats team when they were terrible or the Browns won't beat teh defending Super Bowl Champs Giants last year.

 

Additionally, before the season, it looked like we had a much tougher schedule. The Jags were considered SB contenders, the Browns were a trendy SB pick, the Seahawks always won their division. So basing a team schedule "strength" on a team's record from last season is just silly.

[billsfreak]

When you start out 4-0 and 5-1, 7-9 isn't anything but underachieving for any organization, it doesn't matter who you are. If last season was overachieving, then this organization will never win.

[deep2evans]

For me it's less about the talent base and more about the mind boggling decision making when it comes to playcalling and game/clock management.

 

The games against the Jets, Clev and SF could have all been wins. And the debacle at the end of the half against the Pats* was just the icing on the cake for this inept coaching staff.

 

Add Dallas to the list. That game reigns supreme in regards to coaching !@#$-ups.