mpl6876
-
Posts
985 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mpl6876
-
-
Gailey's main strength as a coach in the past was that he was innovative in being able to create tailor-made systems to best fit the personnel on hand. Professional coaches like Gailey are a special breed. They are confident in their abilities to a fault. I suspect that Gailey saw the game film on Edwards -- but rather than viewing him as a hopeless cause, thought to himself, "I am the guy smart enough to devise a scheme that suits Trent's unique skill set." He also saw a guy who, by the end of last year had no confidence left.
Trent is a bright guy, capable of talking the talk. Under Gailey's off-season tutelage he said all the right things and appeared to regain his confidence after the first preseason game (against Washington) disaster. From a talent perspective, he also has all the goods. Despite a faction of "fans" on this board who would say otherwise, Trent does not have a noodle for an arm. It is likely that Trent DID perform the best of the 3 QBs in training camp and displayed the greatest skillset, when live bullets were not flying.
After two weeks of live action, Gailey came to the astute conclusion that Edwards just doesn't have "it". Regardless of whatever scheme he could cook up -- and given the current impossibility of improving the supporting cast, including the OL -- Gailey came to realize that there was likely nothing he could do to hide the fact that Trent Edwards simply lacks the natural instincts and intangible qualities to play QB in the NFL. Fitzpatrick DOES have these traits -- and Gailey believes that he can better compensate for Fitzpatrick's lack of talent than he can for Trent's lack of instincts and mental toughness.
So in a nutshell, you are saying Gailey was fooled by TE. That Gailey was smart enough to see TE couldn't fool him after two games? Way to go coach! Fitz has the "traits" and Gailey doesn't make him the starter? Now, Gailey believes he can coach up Fitz? Sounds a little confusing and floundering to me? So much for a vote of confidence?
-
As Nix is fond of saying, it is the "body of work" that ultimately prevails. If the particular exchange between us that I referenced were the exception instead of the rule, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Taken by itself, it was not in the extreme on the offensive scale (if there were such a thing). But it was also much less-than-cordial, also. Now, I'm OK with less-than-cordial for the most part when it is the exception instead of the rule. I can chalk that up to someone being on edge and/or having a bad day or just being in a very opinionated mood, or whatever. However, when this less-than-cordial tone is the norm -- almost to the point of being a near constant, well that's where you lose me (and based on multiple posters general disdain for your posting tactics, I suspect lose many others, as well). I could dig through the archives over the past few months and find several such instances, but I just can't be bothered, so I instead pulled up the most recent one that came to mind as an example.
It'd be like if you and I happened to work in the same office together. I might come in and say "Good morning, Mpl", and your response would be "What the hell are you talking about? It's raining outside. Are you nuts or something?". The next day I'd come in and say "Good morning, Mpl", and you'd say "Give me a break. The boss is an idiot. How can it possibly EVER be a good morning around this place? Cut this 'good morning' crap out, would you?!" and on and on it might go like this for several weeks (or even months as has been the case on this board). Well, guess what? Eventually, I'm just going to stop saying "Good morning" and probably end up being a lot less-than-cordial myself. Maybe some people enjoy constant abrasive banter, but not me. I like to have real dialogue with genuine give-and-take, but hey, maybe that's just me.
Spin it anyway you want. Not that it matters but I have lost all respect for you. I offered a genuine apology when you were clearly out of line. I have never never never resorting to immature name calling. In return you give a ranting spin in your defense. Classless Mr. Chase... Stop embarrassing yourself.
-
For the record, I have NO ONE on ignore -- not even you, mpl. Well, the feature is kind of useless anyhow the way it works, so I find it best just to not use it.
Mpl, here's a recent exchange that we had that kind of illustrates my (and probably other's) issues with your posting tactics:
---
Me (responding to another poster):
+1 I already had admiration for Chan's past success as an HC, but I respect him even more now for making this tough decision so early in the season. It is so tiring to see decisions like this made TOO LATE in the season to be of any benefit. By making the move now, Chan is not throwing in the towel on this season -- he's going to fight for wins this season and not give up. Go Chan and Go Bills!
---
You (responding to me):
Give me a break. How bout holding the coach accountable for being out coached and out planned in the Miami game. How bout talking about his offensive game plan, game time adjustments, leadership qualities, and his demeanor on the sidelines. He has been nothing short of terrible in his two starts and your commending him for yanking TE.
UNBELIEVABLE......
---
You respond to me as if I don't even deserve an opinion -- that ANYONE who doesn't think Gailey should be nailed to the cross right this instant is some kind of moron. It's a public forum. I get that. I don't come here expecting unusually high levels of civility and I've been guilty of same myself, but you do this ALL THE TIME and NOT only to me, for SURE. You might have said "I disagree", but you say "Give me a break", instead -- as if I had two heads for simply respecting the fact that Gailey took the Cowboys to two straight playoff appearances as their HC. I commended Gailey for reversing his own decision to start Edwards (a decision that took COURAGE as he most certainly knew it would bring on criticism -- which it did from many) and you tell me "UNBELIEVABLE" as if I were a total ass for recognizing that the man made a courageous decision in an effort to get something positive going. You ask for people to show YOU civility?! You might consider the same when you respond to others. Now, I'm not trying to tell you HOW to post (though I suspect you will perceive this as so), but I think the above exchange pretty well speaks for itself. And we've had several such exchanges whereby I'll make a fairly innocuous observation as I see it (either right or wrong) and you'll jump in and shred it as though I were some sort of freak for even having this thought. It gets old after several exchanges like this.
Now, I've considered that you care about the team SO passionately and you think you know what is wrong and it just drives you absolutely nuts if someone states something that doesn't fully align with your thinking on the matter. That's fine -- I get it -- you perhaps DO care about the team, but you are but one fan amongst tens and hundreds of thousands of fans. There's no way on God's green earth we are all going to agree on how best to go about fixing the Buffalo Bills. I really do attempt to show civility to other posters. I'm not perfect. I've posted things I would have liked to have taken back upon further consideration, but I don't make bashing other posters a way of life on this board. Yeah, 10 years of losing REALLY SUCKS and everyone on this board is hungry for some frickin' WINS. But that's not an excuse for the ridiculously low levels of civility on this board. I feel like I'm wasting my time even writing this as I expect yet another "what an idiot you are" type of response from you, but I'm just laying it out as I see it.
I read your post.
In this case, I firmly believe you have overreacted. I never once implied that you don't deserve an opinion. I never implied that Gailey should be nailed to the cross. I said he should be held accountable. I never implied you were a total ass. I never implied you were an idiot. Where did any of that come from?
You talk about how this is a public forum and you get how people may not be as civil as they should. I used the words "give me a break" and "UNBELIEVABLE" and your offended? Either you are overly sensitive or just looking for a fight.
I know I rub people the wrong way but what you may not realize is that your rubbing me the wrong way too? It cuts both ways. Now that is no excuse for being uncivil. I firmly believe my post was civil. Perhaps a bit harsh but I don't feel it deserved the response you gave me. There really is no justification for what you did...Nevertheless, I will apologize to you if I offended you and I will continue to work on my shortcomings.
-
mpl did get better after a while about it but I agree since this 2nd loss he has been crusading a bit. If you really feel that way though Conrad you should report it. That is the official line from SDS which he put in one of mpls threads a while ago.
That is what I did about a poster recently for exactly the same reason and poof now he is gone and the board is a better place.
I won't report mpl right now because he has made an effort to improve his dialog in the past and warning him at this point about crusading might be the best policy. Like this
Hard Rules.
Posts that contain the following material will not be tolerated and will be removed promptly (and depending on the nature of the offense - your ISP may be notified of these violations):
Do NOT post:
Personal "crusades" (posting the same information/opinion in an excessively repetitive manner. We want posters to share opinions not bludgeon others to death with them.)
and mpl his calling you a little gnat would fall under this
Courtesy is contagious - Just become someone doesn't share your opinion - doesn't make them an idiot.
Which is under
Softer Guidelines:
Activities that are frowned upon:
I very much respect your post. I know what I say isn't popular with many posters here. I get it I am not that close minded although i am sure many of you would beg to differ. I do believe I have been respectful of others and their opinions. I am not so sure I have been afforded the same respect.
I truly am a die hard Bills fan. In the end, al we really want is a great Bills football team. I love this forum and I greatly enjoy debating and discussing the Bills. IMHO, I have done nothing that warrants a ban from this forum. My opinion is just that an opinion. In fact, several here agree with many of the things I have to say. It is simple, if I rub someone the wrong way just place me on ignore. Many have already done that and I respect their decisions. I haven't found the need to ignore anyone even Hossage who abused me on a daily basis.
I'm not going to sit here and say I'm proud of name-calling on the board, but it is what it is. I come to this board in hopes of intelligent dialogue on relevant Bills news and this pest keeps coming around. It's like laying out a blanket for a Sunday picnic to kick back and enjoy some time with your family or friends and suddenly you're swatting at gnats for the next 30 minutes -- it's a total drag and just saps the enjoyment from the experience of posting and surfing the posts. And I don't say this because he routinely attempts to shred my credibility -- that comes with the territory in a public forum. However, the incessant crusading and repetitive nature of his posts just becomes predictable after a short while -- very gnat-like.
Edit: And I could even stand a little bit of crusading if it was actually for something, but he crusades against the team at every possible turn. Gailey's an idiot for starting Trent. Gailey's an idiot for benching Trent. Why can't we be like other teams and make deals and win now. We have to lose all our games and get the top pick (so I can shred the front office NEXT year for the guy they use it on). The dude has some issues. Yeah, 10+ years of losing football is no fun, but the incessant railing against the players, the coaches, the staff, the front office, the owner, the groundskeepers for all I know -- it just gets absurd after a while.
Stop distorting the truth.
Point taken, Bow. Just to clarify though, that it's not MPL's opinion that caused me to call him a gnat, it's his tactics. If you check, I don't post that often, but I'm here multiple times a day. To see nearly every thread with a 4 month/+900 posts member posting the same basic stuff in every one gets to me.
Why wouldn't you clarify your statement to me? You know the one you called a gnat. What kind of justification is that? An apology will be accepted.
-
Failure was evident from the start for Gailey. He is a POOR evaluator of talent, obvious when he wasn't starting McKelvin probably the Bills best defender not to mention he thought the QB and LT could handle the position for another year. This is a horrible position for someone who cannot recognize a good player from a poor one. He is not the right coach for the Bills and I hope this is recognized right away. Giving ANY credit at all to him this is a bad team for him to manage but in that case they need to hire someone NEW to help evaluate talent coming in. That is TRYING my best to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I certainly understand your frustration as a Bills fan. I have been very critical of the Gailey hire. I truly believe he has been horrific after two games. I stand by those comments. However, I think your characterization of Gailey is a bit unfair. He was wrong with TE, no doubt about it and possibly incorrect with regards to other players on the team. However, no coach can 100% correctly evaluate players. Also, he has inherited a team with some many needs. Only the delusional posters here ( there are plenty) would and could think the Bills could be 10-6, 9-7, or 8-8. Lots and lots of unknown variables like the inner workings of management. To consider firing him after two games is really jumping the gun. I can say after two games he is doing a great job of displaying why he should get fired. This won't get better anytime soon. At the end of the season, we will have more knowledge to make an informed decision on whether this new regime floundered for a year or actually made substantial progress.
-
Done! and Thanks.
People resort to insulting behavior when they no longer can intellectually defend themselves and or their positions.
Guys well done.
-
No, I'm not cherry-picking. I agree with the basic premise that you do need to bring in the people you believe that will help your team be successful. However, the Lombardi example just doesn't cut it. Football was an incredibly different game in 1958, with a much higher level of skill and athletic prowess required in the modern game. It was also a smaller league with only 12 teams, with a shorter season of 12 games.
Long story short, I think it's simplistic and wrong-headed to demand that after one season in the modern NFL that it's not only reasonable but expected that the Lombardi example can be easily imitated. Maybe Lombardi was able to immediately bring in the level of talent that put him up to championship level, but in today's game, that takes more time due to a whole host of reasons.
Not sure I agree with you but I can respect your opinion and the tone of your post. Well done. Wish you would have said that in the previous post.
I was wondering if anyone else thought this -- thanks for reenforcing that thought. It does seem pretty obvious based on his postings and gaps of logic.
You know, I've pissed some people off on this board over the years and vice-versa -- goes with the territory. However, when people call me out, I usually reconsider my post and offer an apology if appropriate. For example, I made a rude and unnecessary remark to Bills in VA recently and he called me on it and I apologized. Dean once let me have it for ripping into Kelsay in an over-the-top and inappropriate manner and I apologized for the remark. And I've reconsidered several other posts when challenged with better logic or a more-considered opinion. That's what the board is all about -- give and take -- back and forth -- not just a place to state your opinions, but also a place to LISTEN to other's opinions. I really try to stay flexible on this board and be reasonable. So to all on the board, I will continue my efforts to keep my posts in moderate tones and I hope posters continue to continue to call me out if I'm making a bad post -- that's fine with me -- that's what it's all about. If I don't like a post, I do attempt to attack the post and not the poster -- I think this is something on the board many need to work on.
However, in regards to mpl6876, I'll make the LONE exception -- piss off you little gnat!
That being said maybe you should apologize not to me but the other posters for that horrendous post about Sully playing WR and putting on the pads. Borderline insulting and at least I have the "gnats" to cal you out on it. Guess you really didn't like that.
-
Chan's not hitting the panic button. He knew Trent wasn't great from past performance. Chan has made the most of mediocre qb talent and the only way he could evaluate if Trent was fixable was through regular season games when the real bullets were flying. This is where Trent has failed in the past. Trent failed again and the experiment is over. Now Chan is moving on. Just glad he didn't wait longer than 2 games to do so.
I think if anyone is panicking it's some of the fans here.
Pilsner, do you really think the change in QB is going to make a significant difference? I am being serious and not trying to be a smart ass. Most reasonable fans can only conclude that it will be marginal at best. We all know what we get in Fitz. Hard nosed, tough, not afraid to wing the ball, and terribly inaccurate. That's why he is a career back up. Now, we fans should be happy with a career back up QB running the show? Let me tell you that I am not happy about having such a poor QB in our starting line up. It is what it is. Jerry Sullivan couldn't have said it any better. Hope he is listening because I give him permission to use my material.
You can go ahead and commend Gaily and Nix for starting a career back up QB after week 2. What a great move from a solid organization. We wonder why we haven't done a GD thing in ten years.
I welcome all posters to respond to my post. I cannot see how anyone even the biggest of homers can justify such ineptitude and willful neglect. Like I said from day one when I entered this forum. The organization has failed us fans. They continue to do so by not addressing key positions like QB and LT. I am tired of the lame ass excuses. You think that might have something to do with our ineffective last place offense? You bet it does and so much for the coach em up innovative guru Chump Gailey. He has failed us too. Go ahead and pat his asss for putting in Fitz but is he really saving his asss. The kitchen is only going to get hotter after we lose to the pats and the jets. Wonder what the heck you guys will be saying them? I have a picture in my head of Cam Cameron and the 1-15 Fins of a few years ago. Wondering if their fans were saying oh it's not his fault and he needs time...
We have become one of the worst organizations in football and it shows on and off the field. It's so frustrating to be a fan who really cares. I just wish I could be delusional and irrational as some of you because I know it must be much more fun thinking we might actually be good. However, as a realist and someone who takes into account all variables I cannot indeed believe your distortions and or lies. Wish I could.
P.S. I can't wait to read the next Jerry Sullivan article.
-
Are you kidding me? You're really going to compare the game of football of today to how it was in 1958? And you're going to compare Chan Gailey to one of the greatest football coaches of all time? And THEN you're going to say it's reasonable to expect that level of improvement based off of your comparisons?
You've lost your marbles.
Say what you want but you forgot to address the theme/premise of his point which was "no no...that is not how it works. You determine where the weaknesses are, get rid of the players who can't cut it, and bring in players who can improve your team. As a result you get better, and do not get worse. Frankly, IMHO, he is 100% correct.
Way to "cherry pick" what he had to say and take things totally out of context.
You've lost your marbles.
-
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. My point is that MOST Bills fans thought Edwards was beyond salvation. However, Chan Gailey, who was reputed to be a magician with, to be kind, less than stellar QBs, apparently thought otherwise. I don't know how he arrived at that assessment but I presume he watched all the film on Edwards, talked to everyone he could who's worked with him, talked with his coaching staff, etc. If he did all that, then paid attention to Edwards in OTAs and training camp, and still made him the starter, and if Gailey is the great QB guru he's supposed to be, how else can I take yanking Edwards after two games other than that Gailey really, really screwed up?
So now, after months and months of studying his QBs and building an offense IN THEORY around Edwards' supposed strengths, two weeks into what everyone knows was bound to be a tough season, he's replacing him with a QB who, in Gailey's assessment, wasn't good enough to dislodge Edwards in all those months of practice? Sounds like full panic mode to me.
I don't get the line of reasoning some of you use, that Gailey has to make the change, that Edwards is a wuss, that coaches make changes all the time, etc. Duh! Of course that's all true. But the Edwards of this season is the Edwards of last season. The time to replace him was last February or March. But either from arrogance or a surfeit of wishful thinking, Gailey stuck with him. By his own action (benching Edwards), Gailey has admitted he screwed up.
So let me ask all you critics, does screwing up on the most important position by a guy whose chief recommendation for the job is a reputation for having reasonable success with a collection of meatballs give you even a slight twinge of doubt about him?
Youngmack, I share your same concerns. That was a very well thought out post. I think it is more than fair to start questioning the decisions of this new regime.
Oh by the way, where are those weapons of mass destruction?
I was optimistic about Gailey too, cautiously so, but still optimistic that maybe Buddy and Ralph got it right. That Ralph Wilson, sensing his own immortality and tired of a 10-year playoff drought - particularly a 12-game streak of gut-wrenching, rip-your-heart-out losses to the Cheatriettes* - went and hired a competent, offensive-minded head coach with an eye toward fixing our offense and our QB situation and one with at least a modicum of success working with young QBs in the past.
And I liked what I saw, at least initially. I sensed confidence - and cockiness, in a good way - about Gailey when he stated...
"I've been around enough winning programs that when I walk on the field I expect to win. I don't just hope to win."
I liked the end of 'Camp Marv/Camp Dick', the removal of TVs from the workout rooms, putting players in pads from the very beginning of camp, the two-a-day practice sessions, etc., and I liked the way he handled the media - he seemed honest and forthcoming. It seemed things were different this time around. But after declaring a 'wide open competition' at the QB spot, which we all looked forward to, it turned out to be anything but 'wide open'. Gailey instantly started slithering and weaseling his way out, knowing well in advance of the season that he was handing the reins back to Edwards. And thenGailey did something really stupid - he dressed down a gang of kids having a bit too much fun at Trent Edwards' expense while enjoying the final days of their summer vacation at the Bills' training camp. Nobody's gonna push this guy - or this team - around. Chan showed he was boss. Chan stuck up for Trent. Problem is that Chan had yet to build any credibility with the fans, and had no capital to cash in.
Now, after two blown weeks and miserable losses, it's FINALLY so painfully obvious to Gailey that Trent Edwards can't play QB in the NFL??? Makes you question whether he really does have a clue how to evaluate QB talent, and what might be sitting on our bench that Gailey's ignoring???
“I think he’s gotten better, and that’s the best way I can judge somebody,” Gailey said after practice Monday, providing his first in-depth insight on Edwards since naming him the starter two days earlier. “I’ve seen a light at the end of the tunnel. And that’s what you’re looking for.”
"We are just trying to get the right combination going with personnel, maybe it fits better with Ryan."
“He’s done a good job in practice and he’ll get his shot,” Gailey said, assessing Brohm. “He’s very smart. He knows where to go with the football. He’s got good velocity on the ball."
Chan Gailey - Guru
I enjoyed reading your post. Well said.
-
The homers are forced to hold out on the thought "it can't be the coaches fault", it has to be the QB!!!
No worries, after enough losses they will come around and see what you and I see...a guy that was fired as OC because his offense went 2-14. Although nobody here wants to hold him accountable for that ....
A guy that was supposed to be an offensive guru and correct all the mistakes with Trent Edwards that Jauron and his staff of morons made. A guy who drafted a RB instead of a tackle because he stated that a great RB will make the line block better!!
Down 13-3 with 8 min to go in that Miami game the Bills get the ball on their own 20 yard line...the Bills go to a FIVE WR spread formation set and that causes the Dolphins to suddenly drop into coverage instead of the constant blitzing. Edwards then takes the team 80 yards for a TD drive.
That drive showed me that Edwards can get the job done if he has time to throw and his receivers are open.
So what do the Bills do next game, start the game with a 5 WR set and open up the offense? NO! they go conservative and try and run the ball against last seasons #1 defense against the run...Yea blame the QB when he has trouble making constant 3rd and longs, better bench him!
This guy is starting to make Jauron look good
.....
Thanks for responding. It is good to know that others here share a similar point of view.
Nice freakout.
That is the best you can do?
-
I would call making a judgment after two games freaking out. Looking for marked improvement for a rebuilding team after two games and one draft is freaking out. Trying to compare any coach in the NFL over the past 50 years to Lombardi is delusional. So have fun freaking out. You are freaking out.
What are you going to say when were 0-5 or 1-4 before our bye week? Oh never mind, I already know. You are so predictable in your little delusional bubble. Wake up pal, this team stinks and Gailey has "stunk up the place after two games." Can't you just admit he has completely sucked in almost every way. In case, you don't know the Bills are dead last in offense, averaging a mere 187 yard per game. I know I know its not Chan's fault. I hear you loud and clear. Wondering if you were one of the same guys who told me how Chan was going to beat opposing defenses with short slants, quick three step drop backs, spiller needed an inch of a hole to break it for a td, spiller catches the ball out of the backfield, keeping the defense on it's toes because of the great Chan Gailey play calling, etc....GET THE POINT! Gailey has looked lost and anything but creative and innovative. Out coached and outclassed. Wondering if you would have fired Cam Cameron after his 1-15 start with the Fins? I suppose not because following your logic you would have said it's not his fault and he needs time. BS all the way to OBD.
The best you can come up with is its not Chan's fault and it's only week 2. Well, as a fan who has endured 10 years of shitt, I don't give anyone on OBD the benefit of the doubt. After two games of seeing what Gaily and Nix have to offer, it baffles me that you and so many others are still in their corner.
-
I didn't expect it to be fixed in one year. But changing the starting RB from Week 1 to Week 2 and benching the appointed QB 2 weeks in speaks of indecisiveness. And that is is exactly what people harped on DJ for. Now, in no way am I comparing the two, but the similarity is striking.
No NFL HC is going to mail games in given the paucity of jobs available. Having said that, would it be impossible to pick the best guy at the outset? They should have known Trent was a tease, and that Fitzpatrick gave the team a better chance to win as evidenced by the final games if 2009.
No one is saying they were going to fix it in one season. I just wish they'd chart the best course and stick to it. It's getting to be chaotic.
I was going to reply back but after reading your post I see no need to address him. Job well done and I concur.
Wow, two games into the season with a new head coach and new GM and we're ready to fire them already. That might be a new record!
So after spending the last 24 hours talking about how bad Edwards and the Bills are Sully now calls the change "desperation." Life in his world must be fascinating, I wonder what color the sky is?
Up goes the roller coaster.....
Hey Mike, who said anything about firing Nix/Gailey. Just another one of your distorted post. Reread the posts and you will see no one said a word about firing them.
-
Hey Sully, remember George Plimpton? Of course you do. He was the famous sports writer who would actually participate with professional athletes as summed up nicely in this review of "Paper Lion: Confessions of a Last-String Quarterback" where Plimpton actually practiced with the Detroit Lions:
"George Plimpton was the first, in the sports world, to employ "participatory journalism" in order to produce a story, or in this case a book. Over the years, Plimpton put himself in several different positions for the sake of his readers... hockey goalie... prizefighter... pitcher... he even tagged along on the PGA Tour. However, none of those really hit home on a large scale quite like PAPER LION, the story of Plimpton's trials and errors in training camp with the Detroit Lions prior to the 1963 season. It even led to a movie starring Alan Alda by the same name." (http://www.amazon.com/Paper-Lion-Confessions-Last-String-Quarterback/dp/1592280153)
Why not YOU, Sully? It would be such a great service to your readers to provide that kind of insight into the inner-workings of the Buffalo Bills. Oh, maybe you could lineup at WR and get a real feel for a Donte Whitner hit, no? Perhaps you could lineup at outside LB and fend off a Corey McIntyre block and then write a story telling of your experiences as an NFL player for a day.
C'mon Sully, you can do it -- we want a writer of your talent to get down-and-dirty with the Bills in an actual practice session and then tell us all about your experiences as only a writer of your fine talent can do.
Oh, it would be a VERY GOOD read. Of course, having the opportunity of walking away from practice alive and actually writing the story would be the chance you'd have to take, but hey, you're a tough guy. You can do it! Go for it Sully, go for it!!
Edit: Oh, I'm quite certain the Buffalo Bills would only be too happy to oblige your request.
I have a better idea Chase. Why don't you put the pads on and line up at WR? Maybe then you can get the hell knocked out of you and you might actually start making sense.
The biggest worthless thread I have read since being here. Do yourself a favor and delete it.
-
I think Sully has it dead wrong on this occasion. Benching Edwards after two weeks IS a move of desperation, but not out of weakness. It was obvious to anyone watching that Trent just can't or won't pull the trigger, and he lacks fire or "want to." One thing we know we'll get from Fitz is a guy who will do anything he can to make plays. He's Flutie-esque in a way. Folks do realize he had a winning record with the Bills last year, right? Remember how Flutie made a sub-par OL look better? Watch what happens with Fitz in there. He is not the answer, long term, but he's a much better solution right now than the crap we just watched for two weeks.
I'd wager Gailey earned a lot of respect from the vets on the team when he made this announcement, because I guarantee every one of them know it's the right call.
Funny how you give coach Gailey so much credit for making this move. That amazing me!
Here is my take. I blame Gailey for not starting Fitz in the first place. Your words are Fitz he is a "much better solution," "had a winning record last year," pulls the trigger, has the fire, etc...
How bout holding Gailey accountable... Respect comes from winning and so far Gailey is 0-2 and likely to be 0-4.
-
I thought it was a very well written.
(1) He states "makes me to wonder if he's even remotely as sharp an offensive mind as we've been led to believe." Not sure how anyone can disagree with that statement since the Bills offense is dead last in NFL. I ask what has coach Gailey done after two games?
(2) "They watched the game films. What compelled them to hand Edwards the job after he had failed miserably twice in the last two seasons? Edwards looked the part in practice and preseason, but jobs are won and lost in real games." How can one debate this statement. Then he goes on to talk about how the players rallied around Fitz last year. I can only assume Gailey's ego led him to believe he could make TE a solid NFL QB. His ego blinded him from looking at the facts. The fact is most of us knew TE didn't have it despite his preseason successs. Now, he yanks him after two games and some fans here are praising him for that. Amazing...
(3) He asks "What did the Offensive Genius figure out in two weeks that wasn't plainly evident in those old game films?" Great question and I would like to hear Gailey's response.
(4) He says "but after two games, Nix's guy is performing down to the role of befuddled fumbler, over his head in the dual roles of head coach and offensive coordinator."
Very true statement. True statement. Gailey has done little to nothing in two games. One can only counter with it's two games.
(5) Sully writes "Gailey anointed C.J. Spiller as his featured back." Then he benches him for ML. Also. he hardly uses him in the Miami game. IMHO, it appears that Gailey doesn't know how to utilize three backs effectively or better yet maybe having 3 staring RB is problematic. Either way or disagree with me, it is hard to understand what the hell Gailey is doing with CJ after two games.
(6) Lastly, he says "the guy had six months to coach 'em up and get the offense fixed. Sure did. I remember reading how this was going to happen. I remember all those delusional posts. In fact, I was even starting to believe them. It only took me two games to what up back to reality. Sully goes on to say "instead, it seems like he's making things up as he goes along." Sure does and nothing is more evident by the starting and benching of TE after two games. So much for the confidence factor...
I have to commend Sully on writing such a descriptive and accurate piece. Thanks for trying to hold this organization accountable and thanks for being blunt and honest even it is negative. Thanks for not blindly jumping on the Gailey/Nix bandwagon. I don't want to read some half truths, sugar coated articles, and fact less optimistic proproganda.
Kudos to Sully.
-
In the end, I really don't think it matters who we have at QB. All three guys are not NFL starting QB's and our offensive unit doesn't have a solid OL, TE or WR's. That is a disaster in the works for any QB. I am not convinced that manning or brees could lead this team to a 8-8 record this year. This team, this regime, and this organization is in shambles. It is borderline embarrassing. I am here in San Diego and I have made it known to my co workers that I am a proud Bills fan. I can't tell u how embarrassing it has been walking into the office on Monday morning.
-
Agreed.
Now we have to go through another season of flip flopping QB's.
IMHO, it's a sign that this regime is floundering and searching for answers. So much for a sign of progress. It's only the end of week two...
-
IMHO, BB will get his shot after the bye week. Nothing to lose.
-
+1 I already had admiration for Chan's past success as an HC, but I respect him even more now for making this tough decision so early in the season. It is so tiring to see decisions like this made TOO LATE in the season to be of any benefit. By making the move now, Chan is not throwing in the towel on this season -- he's going to fight for wins this season and not give up. Go Chan and Go Bills!
Give me a break. How bout holding the coach accountable for being out coached and out planned in the Miami game. How bout talking about his offensive game plan, game time adjustments, leadership qualities, and his demeanor on the sidelines. He has been nothing short of terrible in his two starts and your commending him for yanking TE.
UNBELIEVABLE......
-
And this is based on what exactly? Lighting up Nevada in college? Because he hasn't shown anything in the NFL.
He was a steal at 41 for several reasons.
(1) He has the potential to be a franchise QB. Time will tell.
(2) From a financial standpoint he would have cost us very little. Other money could have been allocated to sign a solid experienced player/s
(3) We already knew all 3 of QB's are not quality starting QB's.
(4) Clausen could have gained valuable experience this year and thus we would have a QB with a year of NFL experience under his belt.
(5) If Clausen didn't work out all we would have lost is a second round pick.
(6) No one knows what next years draft class will look like. Locker looks pretty bad, Luck might stay put, Mallot looks clumsy and needs time to develop, Pryor sucks, Ponder got his butt handed to him against Okla, etc... There could be a scenario where there is no franchise QB to pick. Then what? We are stuck with the same old QB's following your logic. Edwards who appears to be finished after 2 games, Fitz who we all know is a decent back up and will never amount to anything but that, and BB who has done nothing since he entered this league. I don't know about you but I would love to have Jimmy on our roster right now!
-
IMHO, the guy was a steal at 41 and we blew it.
-
The coach has a pair of what? After two games and yes it's only two games, the coach's decision making process, game planning, demeanor, game time adjustments, and leadership has been nothing short of impressive. I never jumped on his bandwagon and always stated let's wait and see how he does. I suspect many of you are beginning to second guess your assessment of Chan. I know I have...
-
Maybe he was, I know for sure that I was, as I am always optomistic when it comes to the Bills.
You predicting a score that is lopsisded in GB's favor, when everyone knew we would probably
get hammered, makes you a real nostrodumbass.
We should all consult with you before we get our collective hopes to high, as you are the self
appointed bring us back down to earth man.
That says it all. Maybe you should reconsider your thought process and actually start looking at the facts before you form your delusional thoughts.
Unfortunately I agree with you here. But what pains me the most after the past offseason and these first two games is that this is supposed to be year 1 of the rebuilding process. And yet Mr. Nix seems to have done nothing that would constitute a rebuilding move in my eyes at all. You might rationalize the Spiller pick that way and say he is looking 3 years out. Maybe ... I certainly hope so .. but I'm not sold on that at all. In my opinion this team needs to start rebuilding from the trenches. Until I see at least some of that happening I'm going to assume the Bills are not rebuilding, they are just in a holding pattern.
Great post code monkey. Very good insight and I have to concur with your assessment of the Bills.
ahhh the week 2: I told you so
wow, mpl You are my hero did you really say all that stuff? Must feel good to know how right you were.No it is not an I told you so. You are wrong there. It is more of an "f" you to all of you guys who hammered me for my rational viewpoints. It does feel good too.
So let me get this straight
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
It's because Michael Vick looks like the old Vick that led the Falcons to a division championship. It is as simple as that.