hondo in seattle

BTW, we might not have a franchise QB on this club, but we might have someone better than Fitz.

JW, okay. Your reservations are fair enough. Except for this part: "geez,shefter was wrong." C'mon John! You go too far!

My own opinion is that the 2012 Bills had enough talent to go 8-8 or maybe a little better if coached well. It's not a great roster but the cupboard isn't bare. Good coaches put players in position to make plays. Good leaders get the best out of people. Wanny was neither a good coach nor a good leader. I think his ineptitude made some of the defensive players perform worse than their optimum. Some of these guys will produce better, I think and hope, under Marrone. The offense players mostly are who we think they are. We really need a QB, Freddy needs to get healthy, and Spiller needs more touches.

I don't evaluate coaches so much on their win-loss records but on what they did with the talent the players they were given. One of the things that dismayed me about Chan was that I thought the 2012 Bills, with average coaching, should have achieved more than 6 wins. I thought the defense, in particular, under-performed. I remember Bills squads in the past that were decimated by injury that didn't give up as many points as this D did. The offense had its share of disappointments, too. But maybe I'm overrating the players and underrating the job done by Gailey and Wanny. Maybe the coaches just didn't have enough talent to field on game day. Maybe the Bills weren't out-coached as much as they were out-played. So what do you guys think? Does Marrone have enough toys to play with?

Okay, so we Bills fans are all hip and modern and into football analytics now... so can a football sabermetrician out there tell me if there's a better formula than the Parcell's rule for predicting NFL success?

We traded Lynch for a 5th rounder. And that trade worked out great... if you're a Seattle fan. If a young Lynch is only worth a 5th round pick on the open market, how much is an old RB worth? A 7th round pick??? FredEx's value to us is far greater than his trade value. As others have said, you need two good RBs in today's NFL.

I only saw him play in the BSC Championship game where he was indeed accurate. However, I also noticed that opposing players rarely got within 6 feet of him. Can he keep his composure and still throw with accuracy when under pressure?

Yeah, Kelly, I did hear him say that. That doesn't mean Marrone didn't do some homework to identify what team had better talent. Then again, maybe the report was just wrong. As far as JW wondering if the the search was "exhaustive," Chris Brown reports the Bills met with Marrone 5 times: "President and CEO Russ Brandon said over the course of last week the coach search committee met with Marrone five times. Brandon was clear that Marrone distanced himself from the rest of the pack with each subsequent meeting." Kelly, I think your speculation about Chip Kelly might be right: he may have been rated higher initially but his wishy-washy attitude combined with Marrone's good interviews put Marrone on top. I confess, I was not hugely disappointed when the Bills hired Chan. But there was all sorts of rumors swirling around back then about luring Cowher or Gruden out of retirement, etc. It felt like Chan was a consolation prize. This feels different.

JW, I think they did "leave no stone unturned." I've got to assume the Bills decided to fire Chan weeks ago and began their due diligence then. After vetting several candidates, they narrowed down the list to the guys who were interviewed. But I suspect Marrone was already a top choice before they sat down with him. Russ and Buddy seemed genuinely excited at the presser today. I really think this is the guy they truly wanted. We won't know for a while if Marrone was a good choice. But I see no reason yet to question it. There are reasons to believe he'll succeed and, as a fan desperate for good news, I'll focus on those until he gives me reason to doubt him. Let's hope he never does. If Kyle Williams was correct when he said some players were slacking, it reflects poorly on Chan's leadership. Marrone seems like a guy who could fix slackers. According to one report, Marrone choose the Bills because he thought there was more talent to work here with than at his other option(s). This could be a confirmation of Kyle's assertion: the Bills underperformed because of poor effort.

I wouldn't use the work "skeptical." I think "jaded" might be a better word. I hate to say it, John, because I usually find you to be a clear, balanced voice of reason. But I wonder if too many dashed hopes and unfulfilled expectations have turned you into a Debbie Downer??? There are just as many reasons to think Marrone will succeed as fail. Why focus on the latter? Marrone isn't Chan, DJ, Mularkey or Greggo. The only connection is that he now coaches the Bills. Yet it seems Marrone's new connection with that uninspiring group of men already taints his image in your mind. Just because he's a Bill now doesn't mean he'll fail. We'll find out in time. But, for now, I'm glad we made a change and am hoping for the best. Yeah, you can be a no-nonsense coach in the NFL. Marrone likes to confront mistakes when he sees them. He confronts forcefully. But I don't get the impression he demeans his players in the process. Parcells would actually go too far and did publicly denigrate players, and he still won a lot of games. Given that Marrone played in the NFL for a couple years and coached for 7, I don't worry that he'll be too tough and aggressive for NFL egos.

Thanks, John

More than once source says Marrone was Cleveland's 2nd choice and with us hiring Marrone, they are now in "Kelly or bust mode." Apparently, they don't consider their #3 option nearly as attractive as Kelly or Marrone. We aren't the only ones who think highly of Marrone.

Good observation, Dr. Tooth. On NFL.com, Brian Billick made this comment on the Bills hiring Marrone.... "I think that's a great hire. He brings that pedigree that's kind of popular now, a substantial pro background with that mix of college."

Brandon and Nix didn't hire Marrone because (1) Marrone was cheap, (2) Russ wanted a SU buddy as coach, or even (3) Marrone interviewed well. I think it's a little arrogant to suggest the Bills think-tank (Brandon, Nix, Whaley) are so much more stupid, shallow and careless than we fans are. They might not be the best leadership team in the NFL, but they are far from idiots and they put a lot of thought and effort into this decision. I assume the Bills began their due diligence a month or more ago and knew a lot about each candidate before the interview process began. Presumably they saw a lot of good and Marrone and perhaps discovered some problems with the other candidates. I'm not saying Marrone was the right choice. But two or three other teams interviewed him. Cleveland reportedly interviewed him twice, despite supposedly already deciding Kelly was their man. While Marrone's record at Syracuse wasn't stellar, let's remember that the Orange had only won 10 games in the previous four seasons and no self-respecting athlete wanted to play there. But, yeah, I understand 25-25 isn't the record you want to see in your HC hire. And I admit that the combination of successes, blemishes and questions make it hard to predict Marrone's NFL success. Lovie Smith on the other hand, is a very well known commodity. He spent 9 seasons as the Bears head coach so we know what he can do once he builds a team up. And Lovie had just three winning season in the last six. Overall, he won 56% of his games. The guy's no Bill Belichick. He's no Marv Levy. He's just a somewhat better than average HC. Back to Marrone, Joe Buscaglia says, "Does anyone know whether or not Marrone will be a success? Absolutely not. You'd be a fool to sit there and say with 100-percent certainty and conviction because, quite frankly, it's guesswork at this point." Personally, I'd rather gamble on the unproven commodity (Marrone) than go with the guy who has proven himself to be mediocre (Lovie).

Yeah, I agree. The more I read about Whisenhunt, the less I hate him as an option. There are some successes on his resume. Those who want to credit those successes to the good players he had at the time need then to attribute his failures to the bad players he had. There don't seem to be any sure-fire candidates available and I'm glad the Bills are doing their due diligence. Let's not forget Levy and Belichick had mediocre first stints at head coach too.

What's the "gimmick"? He runs an up-tempo spread offense. There's nothing gimmicky about it. Levey had success with the no-huddle K-Gun. Gailey tried to find success with the spread. Others use the spread more successfully. Chip Kelly's offense is a clever amalgam of old, good ideas. But what probably sets Oregon apart is that they execute it really, really well because of the way Kelly prepares his teams. I'm not sure how well his offense would work in the NFL but it's not a gimmick. Kelly's just a good college coach. He's good at X's and O's and good at getting his players to execute with speed and precision.

I would love to read, "Bills short-list down to Dungy, Gruden and Cowher, leaning heavily toward Dungy. Decision expected soon." Unfortunately, none of the actual candidates give me an unqualified sense of excitement. The guys with HC experience have so-so records. If you want, you can make excuses for them but I'm tired of making excuses for my HC. Amongst the coordinators, none strike me as remotely anything like a sure thing. And college guys like Chip Kelly are always a huge gamble - so many don't adapt well to the NFL. (But I do think Kelly would immediately make Buffalo a favorable destination for FAs). Smith and Whisenhunt are probably the two I would most oppose. I'm not convinced they can't succeed as head coaches. Some of their players seem to really respect them and they've put up some winning seasons. But neither boasts a really strong overall resume. Though, of course, Marv's resume had blemishes too when he came onboard and he provided me with my best years as a fan. I'll reserve judgment on the next coach until I see the product they put on the field at Ralph Wilson stadium.

This is a good OP. Here's the little I've gleaned from a variety of sources - hopefully credible. * Many, if not most, NFL teams use some sort of sabremetric-type analytics when evaluating player performance. These might be used by scouts and/or by coaches, depending on the team and circumstance. * For example, I've read that some teams use their own in-house analytical metrics to measure QB performance (instead of using passer efficiency or QBR). * I've also read that no NFL franchise is as devoted to sabremetrics as some baseball clubs are. The use in the NFL is far more limited. * Sabremetrics in football is difficult because, as mentioned, it's a team sport. If the players around you are untalented or confused, your performance will suffer. If you're coached poorly, your performance will suffer. * Sabremetrics is also logistically difficult. Ideally, each play would be broken down 22 times - once for each player on the field. * Breaking down each player's performance on each play involves a lot of subjectivity. * NFL teams are secretive and it's hard to really know what they're actually doing behind closed doors. Like the OP, I'd like to know more what Russ intends.

The announcement says Ralph Wilson is being replaced by Russ Brandon as team president. Not sure why this is bad news. Brandon was a failure as a GM but that has little to do with this. Anyone who was worried that a senile Ralph was helping to screw things up should be happy. The rumors say that Whaley will replace Nix as GM after the draft, with Nix perhaps staying on in an advisory role. Not sure why anyone would consider this bad news either. I like Nix but he's not done spectacularly well as GM. It's time to let someone else try. I remember when Nix was hired, Peter King lamented that we gave the job to a retiree instead of giving an up-and-coming hotshot like Whaley an opportunity. Whaley - whatever he did or didn't do with the Bills - is highly regarded around the NFL. All in all, I'm happy with today's news.

There are only 32 NFL Head Coaching positions in the world. For someone who loves to coach - the Bills possess a rare & precious commodity: on open HC job. Obviously, there are a few big names out there (e.g. Cowher, Gruden) who can afford to be very picky. Most coaches, though, I think would jump at the opportunity to coach for the Bills. My big worry is that if we keep Nix, he might be on thin ice. If Nix gets fired next year, his new HC would probably go with him. If I was a HC candidate, I would want to work for a good, secure GM.

I can't celebrate the downfall of any man. I can only wish Chan well. I will celebrate loudly when - and if - the Bills hire someone better.

I was actually one of the few who was immediately pleased with the Gailey hiring. I really thought he would do well. But you are right. DJ at least went 7-9 with comparable talent - maybe less talent. I don't see any progress in 3 years of Nix/Gailey. I'm not sure if Gailey and his coaches are poor at dissecting film, poor at running practices, poor at building teamwork, poor at inspiring peak performance, or poor at something else. But this team is underperforming unacceptably. I find the talk from Gailey and Fitz about progress is ludicrous. Football is about winning and we're winning fewer games now than we did in the DJ era. I get what Nix says about the insanity of changing coaches every three years. If there had been some progress made, I'd be willing to be patient with Gailey. But we may actually be regressing. If I were Nix, I'd fire Gailey. If I were Brandon, I'd be very tempted to fire Nix too.

Everyone seems to hate It's-hard-to-win-in-the-NFL Jauron but as you say... DJ - & Perry Fewell - were good defensive coaches April was fantastic with ST. We only lacked a good OC to have a solid coaching staff in those days. DJ's 7-9 records were not abysmal accomplishments considering the paucity of player talent. I think Chan has done okay with limited talent on offense. But Wanny's D is underperforming incredibly, and Chan, as HC, deserves some of that blame. I remember some bad defenses in the past when our poor starters weren't on the field because of injury and our pathetic backups replaced them. Even in these scenarios, our D wasn't this hopeless.

I was deep in the desert in Saudi Arabia for Desert Storm when the Bills destroyed the Raiders 51-3. When I read about the game days later, I was convinced we would win the Super Bowl. My soldiers knew I was a Bills fanatic. So the day of the Super Bowl, which I was unable to watch or listen to, one of my soldiers woke me up at something like 3am to tell me the Bills won on a last second field goal. I was so ecstatic that instead of going back to sleep I grabbed a short wave radio and listened to the Voice of America for the next few hours to hear confirmation. And then I got the sad truth...

I know and it doesn't matter. Sadly, whether we think the coaches are to blame or the players (or both), there is no quick fix. But the apparent lack of accountability really bothers me. Chan needs to send a strong message to the team. I began my post with "If I were Chan." Maybe firing Nix and Chan are the solutions. But I decided to ignore that and look at this frpm the Head Coach perspective. And I can't see how Wanny keeps his job. I'm not knocking Wanny's resume or football IQ. But results this disastrous require strong, decisive, immediate action. Maybe the really big solutions need to happen after the season. But right now we can fire Wanny, lose his passive/lackluster defense, and demonstrate to the players we're dead serious about winning and failure simply isn't tolerable.