dpberr

If we wanted to interview guys with coaching experience, he'd have my vote. 58-53-1 with the Giants, one SB appearance. Won two championships with Las Vegas in the UFL. For whatever reason however, and I'm sure it's a huge IF we all don't know about, he's been passed over for a variety of head coaching openings over the last several years.

I'm tired of hearing the names Billick, Cowher, Gruden, etc. More guys that have been out of the NFL for years. The game evolves year to year and it will pass you by. Getting one of those guys..you'd have serious growing pains as they get caught up for the years missed, rebooting the team in the image that worked for them back in the day...not really knowing if it's still relevant. If you *had* to dig up an ex-coach, at least look at the guys who used to be in the UFL (Fassel, Green, etc.) At least those guys are still coaching and generally more up to date with the intricacies of the game.

Been a Spurs fan since 1986. The Spurs are discounted every year. Robinson/Duncan too nice, Spurs too boring, too old, etc. Four championships under their belt and they always contend.

Reminds me of Jauron canning the Turk. Desperate to keep the head coaching job. That being said, the Eagles should have beaten the Lions. The Lions employ a near identical version of the Wide/9. The offense should have known how to beat it. The defense should have mixed things up a bit since Stafford practices against that D every week and knows what's coming.

Again, I see this as another coaching problem, not a player problem. Gailey's gameplan does not match what Fitzpatrick does well. Gailey hasn't adjusted the plan to what Fitzpatrick can give you. Gailey runs this ridiculous spread offense despite having two fine running backs, massive offensive line, massive fullback and a quarterback whose skills are more appropriate for a smart quarterback with limited arm strength...WCO type of strategy.

Tashard Choice is something guys like Kelsay and Fitzpatrick aren't. He's not complacent. Choice can be cut at any time. He's got no guaranteed contract. He's not guaranteed to be here next year. He's been cut by several teams because he didn't perform. He's motivated. These other guys have their contracts. They haven't been benched or cut for being horrible. In fact, they keep starting and playing no matter how horrible they play, no matter if the team wins or loses. Even Jackson and Spiller can become complacent. At worst, they share carries. It's not like Gailey will ultimately award one of them all the carries and the other one sits indefinetly. For most of the guys you'd turn to for leadership, there is nothing that *personally* motivates them. They have the money and job security locked up. It's one of the reasons the Bill up in New England is successful. He's a total *What Have You Done for Me Lately* kind of coach. Players know that if you don't perform, you'll be benched and/or cut, regardless of who you are. That Sword of Damocles doesn't exist under Gailey.

I really like the nickname. From a historical and strategic context, it's exceptionally appropriate for the defensive line right now.

Bill Cowher? You kid, right? Cowher has been out of the game for a long time now. Much like we're seeing with Wannstedt/Gailey, What may have worked in the past doesn't necessarily work now. The best coaches in the NFL win the game of adjustments in how the game is played. Cowher doesn't strike me as a guy who can make those adjustments. He's a stonecutter. He'll keep chipping away at it until he gets it. We're already doing that with Gailey. It took Cowher nearly two decades to get a Super Bowl ring. Should Gailey be fired, I'd be interested in seeing the Bills interview Fewell or Chudzinski.

Outside of nightmarishly bad strategy, there is another significant problem that isn't on Nix whatsoever, but Gailey. I get that coaches don't want to create panic when things are going bad by losing control by screaming at players, the refs, other coaches. However, no emotion whatsoever tows a fine line between appearing calm and controlled and appearing aloof. The whole team has the look and feel of being lobotomized. You've got the DC up in the press box, detached from things going on down in the field. Gailey shows zero emotion, good or bad. Players aren't angry they get dismantled game after game. It's just another routine day at the office for everybody who's paid to be a Buffalo Bill.

It's got to be about the coaching, and as a fan I've had it. I really thought it was Edwards last year, but it's dawned on me that it's Gailey and his entire way of doing things. This team has good talent, enough of it that it doesn't get blown out of games. And we've gotten blown out of a lot of games during Gailey's tenure. The other miserable thing is that even the casual observer of the Bills sees no leadership. The sideline looks like a bunch of guys there because they are paid to be there. No hunger. No enthusiasm.

The Bills will probably win this game because they don't need it and they tend to show up after a big loss and Alex Smith isn't Tom Brady. The team has the talent. What's most frustrating and unpredictable is figuring out what Chan and Dave are going to do from game to game.

I'll play along and disagree. You want someone to blame. It's us, the emotionally addicted fans. We still bought the tickets, jerseys, tv packages and show up for the games. No matter how bad the product we still place reltaively unhealthy importance on the team in our lives. I thought about that today as I was surrounded by all my Bills "stuff" I've got in my office. We haven't been to the playoffs in over a decade. Yet, we're. all. still. here. In our normal lives we make an effort to distnce ourselves from lousy products, but not with football. We all seem hopelessly magnetized, spending money it takes all of us a long time to make on a fleeting, underperforming product. The thing is...turning it off, not watching, not commenting, divorcing the team completely...just seems so painful, doesn't it?

I'd say: Chan, Dave, it's time to get over ourselves. Your game plans aren't fantastic enough nor are your players that good enough that you don't ever have to make in-game or halftime adjustments. Adjustment wins and loses games.

My keys: 1. Watch 2nd half of NE vs. Buffalo game. 2. Don't do any of that. 3. Use that gigantic offensive line and McIntyre and commit to the run.

I watched it. Much like my other sports teams (Pirates, Spurs), I watch a game, they lose. It's only when I don't pay any attention whatsoever, do they win.

Unless the season really crash lands, it'll be Gailey. Whether we as fans like it or not, the team has shown incremental improvement. Four wins the first year, six the second year. And we're at 2-2 this year regardless of how ugly the losses have been. We are far from the apocalypse at this point. FWIW, I don't think Ralph has been calling the shots for the franchise since the end of last season.

I hope somebody does that video analysis again. I don't think our ends (Anderson and Williams) were blitzing the quarterback much. The malfunctioning defense is not on the players. It's on the strategy. If you brought Williams and Anderson in to rush the quarterback, let them do that. Blitz with abandon. It's not just the Bills that tend to leash their pass rushers. The Giants did it last night and the Ravens did it against the Pats. They have their most formidable pass rushers doing contain on the edges.

The better coaches in the league make adjustments. That was the problem with Gailey and the Bills last year. Brilliant execution of the installed game plan in the first half of games. However, post-half once the oppossing team had tape and adjusted, it went down hill quite fast. I don't want coaches to get fired at 2-2 but as a matter of course, they have to to tweak game plans at halftime. What is killing the BIlls is predictability.

To this untrained fan's eye, Mario Williams did not appear to blitz the quarterback much. He seemed to be on a contain, to hold the edge. He certainly isn't bull-rushing like he did in Houston. I dont think MW is being told to go after the quarterback. This game was like Back to the Future for me. Gailey infatuated with the pass, stale, predictable defense. I would have thought that if you spent that amount of money on a player because he gets after quarterback, why not let him relentlessy do so?

The sun sets on an empire eventually. Nothing precludes it from happening this year. A good team, yes. The great, unbeatable Collosus that once was? No. The Bills confused the Brady last year without a pass rush and spotting the team 21 points. This year, they have a pass rush.

I'm happy with how it's worked out for both teams.

I agree with JR 100%. Less is more with Leodis.

You could be a Cardinals fan. Talk about being on a fan island out there in Glendale. You're 3-0 not becuase you have an obscenly scary defense but it's because of the mistakes of the team you played. They get no credit for beating the Patriots and demolishing the Eagles. I bet 3/4 of the media couldn't name 5 starters on the Arizona D. On the Bills, I hope they stay away from the hype machine for a while. Last year, it seemed the team labored under expectations starting with that Giants game.

If Orlando Brown got suspended by the league for touching Jeff Triplette, BB shoudl be suspended for running after and grabbing the ref because he lost control losing a game (and not getting a bag of ball bearings thrown at his face). The NFL needs to reign in the coaches and this would appear to be an appropriate time to that. I know the replacement officials are less than adequate but the instituion of the game rules and those that enforce them must be respected.

That was a pretty awesome original post. Thanks for that research. You convinced me. I also see in those pictures that the corners aren't a 1/2 mile off the receiver at the snap. Another positive.