vegas55

With all due respect, you are completely wrong. Did you even see the sequence of plays? By Trestman not using his timeouts, he virtually guaranteed that his offense would have virtually no time to work with, in fact, it could have allowed the Ravens to score a game winning TD and leave zero time on the clock. All those things you mentioned are completely irrelevant if there is no time left on the clock for the offense to even run a play. Phil Simms knows a little bit about football, and he and every other NFL analyst who commented on this sequence of plays agreed that Trestman made a terrible decision. This is not rocket science, nor is it impossible for an observer to conclude that an NFL coach blew it. Happens all the time.

Obviously not, you can only judge by the actions and decisions that are made. In the Trestman example, it was obvious how bad his decision was. So he is either an idiot, or was caught up in the moment and not thinking strategically. I choose to believe that Trestman, Harbaugh and Marrone are good and smart coaches, and that bad game management results from getting caught up in the game, rather than these guys just being dumb.

I think Marrone is a great hire and a great coach, but when it comes to game management, he is, like most NFL coaches, extremely deficient. A lot of this stems from the fact that the head coach, standing on the sideline and involved in the emotion of the game and play to play calls, lack the perspective to strategically manage a game. Marrone is the rule, not the exception, and you see from week to week in the NFL head coaches terribly mismanaging the game. Bears head coach Trestman is the latest example. Up by three with less than 2 minutes and the Ravens at the 5 yard line, he does not take any timeouts to stop the clock and allow his offense a chance to comeback if the Ravens scored a TD. Phil Simms is yelling in the booth as to why in the world time outs aren't being used. It's not because Trestman is stupid, it's just that he is caught up in the game and unable to think strategically. It happens all the time. It's ironic that Ravens coach Harbaugh was the opponent, as it was two years ago in the playoffs he rushed his field goal unit out for the final play, the rushed kicker misses the game winner. But the Ravens had a timeout to use, but this never occurred to a head coach caught up in the moment. A team could gain a nice advantage if they employed a strategy coach, someone up in the booth, isolated from the action who views the game from a strategic perspective. Obviously the head coach will have the final say, but the input would be valuable. If the Bills had a legitimate strategy coach I doubt they would be punting from the 36 down 14 points in the 4th quarter. I doubt that the challenges would be as badly mishandled as they have been so far this season. And a minor example from the Steelers game; very last play of first half, clock stopped and some uncertainty what Steelers would do. When it becomes apparent that they will try a Hail Mary, you can see the Bills players yelling and scrambling to set up defense against the Hail Mary. But the Bills at the time still had all three timeouts, which they would never use. The obvious decision is to use a timeout, avoid the scrambling and indecision, and properly set the defense. The reason this wasn't done is because this does not occur to a head coach caught up in the emotion of a game and lacking the perspective to think strategically.

You can't possibly believe that Legursky is the solution to the huge hole at left guard. The Bills really don't, and he grades out only slightly better than Colin Brown, who, I might add, beat out Legursky for the starting position. If Colin Brown beats you out in training camp, you are not the solution to anything. Rinehart could have been retained if the money was right, and he is a huge upgrade over Colin Legursky, who might as well be the same guy.

Among the numerous things that frustrate a Bills fan is some of the penny pinching, mind boggling player moves this team makes. I understand not re signing Levitre, but knowing losing him creates a huge hole, how in the world do you let Chad Rinehart go to San Diego for the minimal money it would have cost to retain him. And our play was so horrible at that position that they released "starter" Colin Brown in mid season. How many early season close games did his terrible play at guard cost us. It would have cost the Bills slightly more than one million dollars to retain Rinehart over Colin Brown. Rinehart was a starter last year, Brown a scrub who was never close to beating out Rinehart. This for a team 20 million dollars under the cap. Penny wise, pound foolish - again. Never understood the release of David Nelson either. Aside from Stevie, which receiver on this roster is going to match the 61 receptions Nelson had in his last full season with the Bills?

You simply cannot, as a 3-6 team, trailing by 14 points, fourth and five, punt the ball from the 35 yard line. Are you kidding me. So when Marrone comes on WGR, for his Friday morning interview, with his condescending attitude, I hope the boys man up and challenge his awful coaching decisions. But I doubt that they will. But it's all about accountability, right Doug. You are 3-7, and you may or may not match our 6 win season of last year. Accountability.

It's a good point; but its pretty clear that had the Bills traded down again, from 16 to very late in round one, they still would have landed E J. And got the 5 year deal.

The entire post concerns trading back up. The title of post is trading up. How is that not descriptive of the subject matter of the post? Is this really about a title, or just an attempt to censor a post. Talk about nitpicking.

First pick at # 8 has to be a playmaker - defense most likely. Trade back up into the very end of round one - likely Ravens at 32; and take your QB - Nassib.

But it's happened before, and the loss of Levitre hurts this team whether a guard is chosen first or not.

And this illustrates the problem with the Bills, they are always running in place. With the # 8 pick they take a guard to replace a very good guard they let go (Levitre). Even if this guy is a good pick, it's unlikely he will be as good (and as durable) as Levitre, at least in his first two years. So your #1 pick doesn't really improve your team at all; you are just running in place. That's not to say the Bills should have matched the mega contract the Titans gave Levitre. The Bills should have extended Levitre in year 2 or 3, when it was apparent that he was a solid player. But to finally make a good draft choice (Levitre), live through his growing pains and then lose him after just 4 years as he enters the prime of his career illustrates just how bad this front office is, and why it has been so long since we made the playoffs.

I would feel a bit more confident in this analysis if this guy did make such obvious errors - he has no idea where or why Fitz threw that game ending pick against Pats, but everybody, including TJ graham himself, knows that the ball was thrown exactly where T J was supposed to be. Good observation on Fred J though, fumbling the ball was a huge issue with him last year, and he escaped with very little criticism over it.

The decade long failure to make the playoffs is a systemic failure which continues to this day. The loss of Levitre is only the most recent example. The draft is difficult for every team, especially the Bills, in identifying and drafting quality NFL starters. Look at any teams draft, and most selections never pan out. So when you do find a gem, like Levitre, it's the exception, not the rule. And now we lose him, after developing him through the growing pains of rookie year etc. Now it's back to the drawing board, and the draft, to try to replace him, after only 4 years. I agree the Bills should not have gotten into a bidding war and pay Levitre $8 million + to play guard. What a successful franchise does is recognize a quality player like Levitre and extend his contract in year two or three, and not wait until free agency renders him expensive and unsignable. For the umpteenth time, it's back to the drawing board to replace a quality starter we should have never lost.

The read option based offense is the coming thing in the NFL and has given even great NFL defenses fits, even when those defenses had weeks to prepare. It's certainly superior to any offense the Bills have run in recent and not so recent years. We now have a huge hole at the QB position, and an upcoming draft where the QB prospects are mediocre, at best. The Bills have few options/solutions. Here's one: trade for Vick and adopt the read option offense. Draft EJ Manuel in round 2 as Vicks successor. Both are great candidates to run the read option, and can be very productive in that setting. The alternative is to draft or trade for a mediocrity and install him in a traditional NFL offense and watch a rerun of the past decade, while the rest of the NFL passes us by.

Using statistical analysis to compute a players worth/value is only one aspect of moneyball. It's an aspect that Polian says wont work in the NFL and I tend to agree. But the other aspect of moneyball is the use of statistics, and not gut feelings or traditions, in determining game strategy decisions. The Oakland A s used the thousands of hours poured into sabermetrics to determine game day decisions. For example, sabermetrics demonstrated conclusively that the use of the bunt and most related small ball tactics were terrible strategy. Sacrificing an out just to move a base runner up 90 feet is bad strategy, regardless of the experience and gut instincts of a manager. The A s exploited this, and in fact, bunting by a non pitcher has become fairly rare in MLB So I hope the Bills embrace this aspect of moneyball in making statistically/scientifically based game management decisions. At the very least, we would see a lot less punts from the 34 yard line

A better question is why the Super Bowl is not held on a Saturday night. There is no conflict with college football at that time of the season, most people are off the next day etc etc. A Saturday Super Bowl has multiple advantages. The reason it's held on Sunday is because its always been that way. The status quo is a difficult thing to overcome.

Recent times ? I don't think any of these guys qualify as QBs who played in recent times. Phil Sims & Jeff Hostetler - try ancient times.

I have been a Chan defender, but wow is he making it tough. You can understand a coach saying some dumb stuff right immediately after a game had ended, but with 24+ hours to think on it Chan stated the following: He repeated and confirmed his statement that he decided against the field goal when he learned it was 52 yards instead of 50. He stated it was "Fred's turn" as a partial explanation as to why one of the NFL's most dynamic backs gets 8 total touches His explanation as to the mangling of clock management & play calling at the end of first half, was in part that they had called a screen pass that they had not used before, and did not expect the Rams to stuff it. This from a coach who has used the screen pass more than any NFL team in recent weeks. He was shocked the Rams were expecting it. WOW

Nice to see George out there hugging all the Rams players almost as soon as the game ended. What a prince. After dropping two game ending interceptions, and completing blowing the coverage that led to the Tenessee loss, he is the first guy out there hugging the opposition. We need to get rid of losers like this.

That he was told originally that it was a 50 yard field goal, but when to told it was 52 yards, he decided to punt. And then wasted a time out to accomplish the punt. I am not making this up. D

Talk about a terrible evaluation of talent. It's taken this long for the coaching staff to realize Justin Rogers can't cover anybody? The Titans game alone demonstrated that, but its been a season long problem. The entire training camp and preseason, McKelvin was our slot guy, and looked very good. But i guess he had a bad game against the Jets, and was banished to the bench. Of course you could have benched the entire starting defense after their performance against the Jets. He has played well at corner since taking over for Williams, and quite frankly, he looks to be a better db than Williams or Rogers. But Rogers has been just god awful all season, and its gotten to the point that he can't cover anybody. McKelvin has his faults, but there's a reason he was taken in round one, and Rogers in round 7. The troubling part is just how long it's taken for the Bills coaching staff to recognize Rogers horrible performances, and finally bench him.

A very good defensive effort against Colts, and a poor offensive effort by Bills, leads to heavy criticism of Chan, while Wanny slides under the radar. But not so fast. A number of poor defensive calls lead to Colts picking up first downs on third and long situations. But the absolute worst, and the reason why Wanny just does not get it and why he must go, was Colts last possession. Less than 2 minutes, Colts have 3rd and 10, Bills have no timeouts. A first down by Colts ends the game. So what is Wannys defensive call? Well you can see for yourself if you have NFL rewind, but here it is - he has his safeties lined up 20 + yards off the line of scrimmage. He is still trying to prevent the long pass when a 10 yard pass ends the game. And that's why Gilmore is left in single coverage on the Colts # 1 receiver, and why the Colts pick up the game ending first down on a 10 yard pass. Because our genius DC conceded it. A long pass or a 10 yard pass both end this game. It's a little harder to complete a long pass ( see Ryan F.) but good old Wanny is going to take that long pass away by playing his safeties back and losing the game. Kind of like a baseball game; tie score, bottom of 9th, less than two outs, runner at third. You bring the outfielders in to play shallow, because a long fly ball ends the game whether its caught or not. Wanny plays his outfielders deep.

The whole point is that there is plenty to be critical of or negative about when it comes to covering the Bills. So with so much material to work with, you shake your head when a guy like Hamilton criticizes the coach for something completely off the wall.

So our football expert/critic Paul Hamilton,whose credentials are that he played high school hockey, comes on WGR radio show this morning criticizing Gailey on the last play call (interception); stating that Gailey should know better than to call a pass to a rookie in that situation. It's hard to believe this guy has been assigned to cover an NFL team this long and not know a thing about pro football. This isn't high school Paul. Gailey did not/does not send in a play specifically designed to go a certain receiver. This is how it works in the NFL: the play that is sent in calls for the multiple receivers to run specific routes. As the QB awaits the snap he reads the defense, determines where the best option is, and throws it to that receiver. Not surprisingly, the Pats defense (pre snap) rotated coverage towards Stevie Johnson, and Fitz reads and decides where the coverage is weakest. But the play Gailey sent in was not designed for the ball to be thrown to the rookie, the QB decides which receiver to go to Hamilton has Been covering the Bills for how long now?.

Cutler played the entire first half and produced 3 points while his running game was completely ineffective