Is coaching the reason for a culture of losing?

[GrudginglyOptimistic]

Coaching is a big part of the modern game. Who calls the plays?

 

The way some would wish it, Bill Walsh was an average coach that was nothing but lucky when he happened to land a 3rd round QB named Joe, his revolutionizing the game was no big deal. He had 2 losing seasons to start out his career and we should stop there because we wouldn't want the 3rd season, when he won a Super Bowl, to be discussed. Don Shula had 2 losing seasons out of 33 with two different organizations because he always had great QBs carrying him around. Kiick who? Csonka what the fug? Joe Gibbs had 3 losing seasons out of 16 and won 3 Super Bowls on the coattails of a number of gifted QBs like Mark Rypien. Oh, I sure these examples don't count because they somehow, actually miraculously given the time spans involved, always had more talented rosters than the rest of the NFL.

Granted there are the special cases (a Parcells for example and maybe a Gibbs though he sucked badly in his last outing with the Skins getting outcoached by non other than Jauron in one of our too rare victories)

 

There are also seem to be examples like Rich Kotite who not only coached a team to a horrendous record but some how got another HC shot after sucking and sucked again.

 

However, history seems to be even fuller of coaches who like Marv positively sucked in his first stop and then earned HOF status with his Bills gig.

 

Even the best Xa and Os HC around Bellicheat just sucked in his first go round with Cleveland, demonstrated his marginal character by publicly accepting and then pulling a Sarah Palin in his next HC go round and proving lucky that Bledsoe got hurt so his great pick of Brady could lead them to victory).

 

The bottom line is that most coaches are capable of winning in the right situation but also the same talent can suck in a different situation with same coaching skill (look how great Lombardi was with GB but simply mediocre at best in DC. Most coaches seem quite capable of both winning or losing badly depending on the situation.

 

I agree with you for example that Bill Walsh is one of the great one, but I also realize he actually never accomplished what I think is necessary for an NFL HC to be ranked as a great which is to win in different places or very different situations with different personnel (I consider Gibbs to be one of the greats despite his late career faux pas as his two Skins teams were quite removed from each other by time and the personel he had to employ). Walsh one of the best O architects and game schemers, but he never proved his greatness by being a pro success except as an assistant elsewhere.

 

For the Bills, if one is looking to establish a losing habit and it was Ralph who hired eveyone of the Admin losers who produced the 0 for the decade run.

[crazyDingo]

(The Bills) - (Bill Polian) + (free agency) X (crap OL * crap DL) / bad coaching = LOSING FORMULA

[thewildrabbit]

If we had Manning or Brady, we won't have been out of the playoffs for a decade. Coaching in the NFL is so overrated. The only decent QB we had in 10 years was Bledsoe and we should have made the playoffs. It comes down to QB play first and then oline/ dline. We have had a decent dline in the last 10 years but our QB and oline play has been lacking. Everything else is just gravy.

If it's all about the QB,why didn't the Bills win that first super bowl against the NYGiants, Jeff Hosttetler was the better QB? Why didn't Dan Fouts, Dan Marino or Fran Tarkington ever win a super bowl?

 

It's a TEAM game, its not just the QB, it's everything! Coaching, players, scheme's and some luck.

 

Jauron has had so many chances to field a playoff team with the Bills

 

In his first year the Bills are desperate for a safety so he drafts Donte Whitner who was rated as the 56th best player at #11 = fail

 

He trades up for McCargo and drafts a guy everyone else thought would go in the 4th round with a first round pick =fail

 

He brings in two very expensive O linemen in free agency who play so poorly it makes their best O linemen want more money because he finds himself as the lowest paid pro bowler in the NFL = fail

 

To add to that, instead of paying the guy they trade him, and instead of drafting a new young OT stud they replace him with a guard in the draft=fail

 

Jauron loses his offensive coordinator, who was on the verge of getting lynched by fans anyway and then replaces him with an understudy who runs the same crappy scheme= fail

 

How many chances does the guy need to get it right? It looks to me like he needs to continually change the players HE drafts or brings in as free agents.

 

It looks to me like Jauron fails because he really doesn't have the skills of a top NFL head coach= 7-9= lucky, as its tough to win in the NFL, just ask Bill Belichick

[Sisyphean Bills]

Granted there are the special cases (a Parcells for example and maybe a Gibbs though he sucked badly in his last outing with the Skins getting outcoached by non other than Jauron in one of our too rare victories)

The real point was that there is an obvious difference between records such as 31/33 and records such as 1/8. Anybody that attributes such a huge swing to nothing more than helpless misfortune is trying to con themselves. It has been mentioned before, but once again, our head coach has total control over his staff, he has abundant input into the composition of the roster through free agency, the draft, and which players make the team, he chose the systems, he has final say on game day as to tactical decisions, and so on. Portrayal as a victim of venomous fate is clearly overblown excuse making. At some point, to be considered great at one's job, one has to actually be great and in the NFL that is measured in wins. Dick understands that and has said it very directly himself.

 

I'm sure we can find faults with any coach, including each one in the Hall of Fame, if we want. But, just taking this one as a for instance, Gibbs may not have been as successful the 2nd go around (did you mention the new ownership?), but his version of not successful still got the Redskins in the playoffs.

[jwws9999]

the culture of losing comes from that idiot owner Wilson, who has managed to screw up every time the organization had a winning system in place

[C.Biscuit97]

Tell that to Tony Sparano and Mike Smith. While you're at it, ask John Harbaugh as well. The NFL is a league built on parity where most teams have roughly the same talent level, hence all the 7-9, 8-8, and 9-7 clubs. When you've got a guy who makes good decisions, can manage the clock, and puts players into positions to succeed, you'll win.

 

Most of the franchises do not have elite coaches. Surprisingly, it's the teams that do which make the playoffs year in and year out. I'm referring to Belichick, whoever Pittsburgh has/had, Jeff Fisher, Andy Reid, and perhaps Tom Coughlin. And there are plenty of up and coming coaches.

 

You cannot tell me with a straight face that an average to above average coach would have gone 2-8 in the final ten games last season.

 

 

Chad Pennington, a multiple playoff QB, and Matt Ryan had one of the best rookie seasons ever for a QB. They were, IMO, the real reason those teams made the playoffs.

[billsfan89]

Chad Pennington, a multiple playoff QB, and Matt Ryan had one of the best rookie seasons ever for a QB. They were, IMO, the real reason those teams made the playoffs.

 

They were part of the reason they made the playoffs. Pennington was asked not to loose games by Sparano. The fact that Sparano built a great ground game (Wildcat plus two good backs in Brown and Williams) and a great possession receiving game (Fasano and Co). The fact is Pennington was good because the coaching not only played to his strengths but put in a defense and ground game that helped Pennington succeed. You can't say coaching wasn't just as big if not bigger to the Dolphins huge turnaround.

 

Also Matt Ryan had Turner (I believe he was the NFL's leading rusher correct me if I am wrong) a great back who took pressure off of him. The Falcons also had a defense that got really lucky in terms of getting turnovers at the right time and other bounces and breaks that any playoff team needs. So I would say the new coaching staff in Atlanta was pretty instrumental to the success of the Falcons last year because they eased Ryan into the situation with Turner than once he got more games under his belt he opened up the play book.

 

Ever team that made the playoffs last year had a good coaching staff that made the right decisions and draft choices that led to a playoff run. Had DJ been a better coach over the last 3 seasons we should have had at least one playoff berth (Also we should have guys like Nick Mangold and Nagta on the team).

[Dante]

Bills have always been too cheap to get decent coaching. Don't seem astute enough to find good young coaching prospects either

[Guest dog14787]

If we had Manning or Brady, we won't have been out of the playoffs for a decade. Coaching in the NFL is so overrated. The only decent QB we had in 10 years was Bledsoe and we should have made the playoffs. It comes down to QB play first and then oline/ dline. We have had a decent dline in the last 10 years but our QB and oline play has been lacking. Everything else is just gravy.

 

 

While a great QB like a Brady can lift a whole ball club up and carry them, I think its a combination. The better the coaching staff and defense, the worst your QB could be and still win ball games. Belicheat it a good example, He is perfectly capable of winning ball games with an inferior QB (within reason)

 

Ravens are another good example where top notch defensive play gives an average QB a much better chance to succeed.

 

The Big Tuna in his time could win ball games with almost any starting QB in the league. Joe Gibbs was also capable of taking almost any QB and winning ball games.

[C.Biscuit97]

Bills have always been too cheap to get decent coaching. Don't seem astute enough to find good young coaching prospects either

 

 

Mularkey was a good coach we ran out of town because of Losman's short comings. Tom Clements did a great job with Aaron Rodgers last year. Seteve Fairchild took over a team that won 7 the previous 2 years combined & won 7 games and a bowl game in his first season. The head coach of Louisville is a former Bills QB coach.

 

There has been talent but because of the blame the coaches rather than the players, they get run out of town.

[Malazan]

Great Coaches don't suffer poor Quarterbacking

 

Great Coaches also seem to choose Great Assistant Coaches who provide excellent coaching to their players.

[C.Biscuit97]

They were part of the reason they made the playoffs. Pennington was asked not to loose games by Sparano. The fact that Sparano built a great ground game (Wildcat plus two good backs in Brown and Williams) and a great possession receiving game (Fasano and Co). The fact is Pennington was good because the coaching not only played to his strengths but put in a defense and ground game that helped Pennington succeed. You can't say coaching wasn't just as big if not bigger to the Dolphins huge turnaround.

 

Also Matt Ryan had Turner (I believe he was the NFL's leading rusher correct me if I am wrong) a great back who took pressure off of him. The Falcons also had a defense that got really lucky in terms of getting turnovers at the right time and other bounces and breaks that any playoff team needs. So I would say the new coaching staff in Atlanta was pretty instrumental to the success of the Falcons last year because they eased Ryan into the situation with Turner than once he got more games under his belt he opened up the play book.

 

Ever team that made the playoffs last year had a good coaching staff that made the right decisions and draft choices that led to a playoff run. Had DJ been a better coach over the last 3 seasons we should have had at least one playoff berth (Also we should have guys like Nick Mangold and Nagta on the team).

 

 

If you really think a team quarterbacked by a guy who is currently out of the league for 2 seasons was a playoff team, you're kidding yourself. It is almost a miracle we got 7 wins. And last year, all the pieces were in place until the Arizona game and everything changed.

[C.Biscuit97]

While a great QB like a Brady can lift a whole ball club up and carry them, I think its a combination. The better the coaching staff and defense, the worst your QB could be and still win ball games. Belicheat it a good example, He is perfectly capable of winning ball games with an inferior QB (within reason)

 

Ravens are another good example where top notch defensive play gives an average QB a much better chance to succeed.

 

The Big Tuna in his time could win ball games with almost any starting QB in the league. Joe Gibbs was also capable of taking almost any QB and winning ball games.

 

 

BB failed with Kosar, Testaverde, and Bledsoe. Those QBs had borderline HOF resumes. Can the same be said for Jauron's QBs?

 

I agree on Gibbs but IMO, he is like a top 5 coach EVER. Parcells is also a very good coach but besides the Giants, he struggled to maintain consistent success at his other stops. But obviously, they are great coaches. But the fact remains, 90% of great coaches have great QBs. Jauron has never had an average QB til this point.

[Guest dog14787]

BB failed with Kosar, Testaverde, and Bledsoe. Those QBs had borderline HOF resumes. Can the same be said for Jauron's QBs?

 

I agree on Gibbs but IMO, he is like a top 5 coach EVER. Parcells is also a very good coach but besides the Giants, he struggled to maintain consistent success at his other stops. But obviously, they are great coaches. But the fact remains, 90% of great coaches have great QBs. Jauron has never had an average QB til this point.

 

 

I wouldn't have even put belicheat on a list with Parcells or Gibbs until I seen what he was capable of doing with Cassel. I gained allot of respect for belicheat last season.

 

DJ has a good one now in TE

 

I think Fitz's stock is also going to rise and we have the best 1,2 combination since the Kelly/ Reich era, not that Edwards or Fitz deserves to even be mentioned with them yet, but I really like our QB's (aside from Hamdan)

[C.Biscuit97]

I wouldn't have even put belicheat on a list with Parcells or Gibbs until I seen what he was capable of doing with Cassel. I gained allot of respect for belicheat last season.

 

DJ has a good one now in TE

 

I think Fitz's stock is also going to rise and we have the best 1,2 combination since the Kelly/ Reich era, not that Edwards or Fitz deserves to even be mentioned with them yet, but I really like our QB's (aside from Hamdan)

 

 

See, I think the Cassel think is completely overrated.

1) They were still an undefeated team.

2) Randy Moss makes QBs. He changes gameplans. Just ask Culpepper, George, Cunningham, and Brady. They all had far and awy their best seasons with Moss. They aren't too many receivers ever created with Moss' talent.

3) I don't think Cassel is great by any stretch by he wasn't as bad people thought either. He sat behind 2 Heisman winners in college and Brady in the pros. He probably learned a ton by being around those guys (like how to funnel from Leinart and how to knock up chicks by Brady).

 

I think Gibbs and Parcells are great coaches. But BB is very overrated IMO.

[Guest dog14787]

See, I think the Cassel think is completely overrated.

1) They were still an undefeated team.

2) Randy Moss makes QBs. He changes gameplans. Just ask Culpepper, George, Cunningham, and Brady. They all had far and awy their best seasons with Moss. They aren't too many receivers ever created with Moss' talent.

3) I don't think Cassel is great by any stretch by he wasn't as bad people thought either. He sat behind 2 Heisman winners in college and Brady in the pros. He probably learned a ton by being around those guys (like how to funnel from Leinart and how to knock up chicks by Brady).

 

I think Gibbs and Parcells are great coaches. But BB is very overrated IMO.

 

 

I agree with you there, Cassel was allowed to jump into the drivers seat of one bad arss race car last season, heck, you or I could have even driven the thing and won some football games. geesh

[KOKBILLS]

I was talking to a friend who is a Giants fan and he said that the biggest problem with Buffalo in the last decade plus was the coaching because it breed a culture of loosing. He said Jauron was the epitome of what Buffalo had been missing for the better part of a decade. Jauron makes bad clock management decisions is too weak with in game play calling and long term he never makes good adjustments as well as he consitantly gets out coached form a game plan perspective.

 

I think Your Friend is a pretty darn smart fellow...

 

Seriously his thoughts are dead-on IMHO...

[SouthGeorgiaBillsFan]

I don't think anyone will say that lack of a quality QB has hampered this franchise but isn't coaching just as big a problem? I mean Bledsoe gave us a few quality QB years and we didn't make the playoffs. I think even if we had a mid level QB we probably would have only made the playoffs once maybe twice over the last decade. I think coaching goes hand and hand with QB play and the quality of the team.

 

Over the last decade we have had bad coaching staff and had a good coaching staff been able to develop a QB or shield the differences of a QB like JP or an aging Bledsoe. To me we don't maximize the talent we have and our coaching often hampers the progress of players and has terrible drafting tendencies (TD going for Fat Mike, JP, and Mcgahee as well as DJ going for too many DB's) which long term holds back a franchise.

 

Like I said a QB is obviously important to a franchise but unless you have an elite QB bad coaching will hamper the franchise big time. And its hard to get a quality QB but its easier (If you are willing to pay for one) to get a good head coach.

 

No. Bad QB play and bad play in the trenches = bad teams. The only problem with the coaching is that it changes too frequently. I think it is pretty obvious that coaching *IS NOT* the problem when you bring in new coach after new coach and still get the same results. Firing coaches doesn't do much to mitigate the fact that you still have the same bad team. In fact, it really inhibits the team's ability to establish continuity and thus work for several seasons to build a roster of players that fit that coach's philosophy. Every time a new coach comes in, the team has to adapt a new philosophy, and all of a sudden the team must begin the three-four year process of rebuilding its roster according to the new philosophy. I don't really understand how so many fans are too ignorant to see that.

[keepthefaith]

No. Bad QB play and bad play in the trenches = bad teams. The only problem with the coaching is that it changes too frequently. I think it is pretty obvious that coaching *IS NOT* the problem when you bring in new coach after new coach and still get the same results. Firing coaches doesn't do much to mitigate the fact that you still have the same bad team. In fact, it really inhibits the team's ability to establish continuity and thus work for several seasons to build a roster of players that fit that coach's philosophy. Every time a new coach comes in, the team has to adapt a new philosophy, and all of a sudden the team must begin the three-four year process of rebuilding its roster according to the new philosophy. I don't really understand how so many fans are too ignorant to see that.

 

OK, then I guess we just let Jauron continue until the front office delivers a better QB and better lineman. Wait a minute, doesn't Jauron have a say in personnel decisions? Could he be giving poor input into player selection? Nah, he's a great coach with a great coaching philosophy and he is giving good input into player selection. It's just that the QBs and lineman won't do what he wants them to.

[billsfan89]

No. Bad QB play and bad play in the trenches = bad teams. The only problem with the coaching is that it changes too frequently. I think it is pretty obvious that coaching *IS NOT* the problem when you bring in new coach after new coach and still get the same results. Firing coaches doesn't do much to mitigate the fact that you still have the same bad team. In fact, it really inhibits the team's ability to establish continuity and thus work for several seasons to build a roster of players that fit that coach's philosophy. Every time a new coach comes in, the team has to adapt a new philosophy, and all of a sudden the team must begin the three-four year process of rebuilding its roster according to the new philosophy. I don't really understand how so many fans are too ignorant to see that.

 

I agree in sports like Baseball and Basketball coaching is ancillary to the talent you have (Even the best coaches in either sport can't take crap teams that much past their talent level) BUT in football the difference between the Lions and Steelers/any other great team isn't that big. The league is mostly made up of 8-8 teams who count on injury, in game luck, and unexpected production to make the playoffs or lead them to a terrible season.

 

Now in football most teams are 8-8 talent level but if you hand off that 8-8 team to a DJ who is going to mismanage the clock, put in bad game plans, and not make long term adjustments through out the season than you are pretty much costing your self a game or two a year and you make going 7-9 and missing the playoffs a certainty.

 

Also Head coaches have a huge hand in the draft process. So if we go with a DJ who is going to keep drafting DB's instead of front seven players than once again you aren't doing yourself any favors. I mean imagine that 2006 Bills team with Nagta and Mangold anchoring both lines (Nate, Fletcher, and Takeo were all still on that D along with Mcgee and Schobel) and JP was having his good year. You don't think with those players and better coaching we should have gone 10-6 and made the playoffs?

 

I just think that a better coach with a much better support staff could have developed JP/Trent or used Bledsoe to get to the playoffs once or twice. Sure QB is important but if you have good coaching it makes it easier to get a better QB. There is a reason Gibbs as other posters have mentioned won 3 SB's with 3 QB's why Parcells took Simms (A above average QB) to two super bowls and took Bledsoe to another and had Tony Romo (Who developed because Parcells brought in guys like Bledsoe and Testaverde to mentor him and Parcells had him on the bench for over 3 seasons) develop into a pretty good QB.

 

In addition to Gibbs and Parcells There are a lot of coaches who are HOF caliber that develop multiple QB's over their careers. Holmgren developed Favre and Hasselbeck. Cower took Rothelisberger and Niel O'Donnal to Super Bowls and had good runs with Kordell Stewart. Gruden revived both Rich Gannon and Brad Jhonsons careers. Bill Walsh had Young and Montanna. So to say great QBs make coaching just isn't true.

 

Like I said the coach is so important because any edge you can get in the NFL is huge and not having that edge in God knows how long is breeding a culture of loosing No one is saying that bad lines and bad QB play don't also lead to that but it starts with coaching. If we had drafted differently and developed players better maybe we get better line play and that would lead to better QB play.