HamSandwhich

Your premise is that Gailey WILL be just as bad next year. I'm saying, thats not necessarily true. Agree to disagree. Obvious reasons for not challenging him directly has nothing to do with the topic itself.

What I'm saying, is there have been plenty of coaches that have had a "track record" of success. Look at Spurrier for example, everyone thought he would be a good NFL coach. What happened? Track record does not always translate into a good coach, and for the most part, new NFL coaches go through a couple of years of turmoil before they are anything, IF they will be anything. Sure, you can point to RECENT coaches, but over the history of the NFL, which people like to so quickly forget, those coaches don't fair quite as well as often as people like to believe. Continuity would actually be a departure of the same old same old at OBD, they have rinced and repeated 3 years and out, and it hasn't worked. Time for a change. I wasn't about this when it was Jauron, but now I feel we need to stay the course. Yes, things can change, and they do, often, in the NFL. Next year we could be talking about 8-5 rather than 5-8 under the same regime. Nobody wants to believe it, everyone wants to point to what has been done recently, but a coach can change concepts yearly and can change the entire complexion of the team by tweaking things here and there. A wholesale change is not needed. . For obvious reasons, I will not directly challenge you

That's worked out well for us!

No, its not antiquated, its people getting lucky recently. Like I said in the originoal post, its the exception, not the rule, if you look at it over the lifetime of the NFL. People only want to remember whats happened recently. Well if you do that, you're doomed to repeat history, and history indicates it takes time to get a team going in the right direction when you blow the team up. Secondly, I really hate people who think they are the end all be all to all discussions. Get off your high horse, you can't say I'm WRONG as its my opinion, it may differ from yours, but cannot be wrong. Its funny because people can't destinguish between the two parties.

We've done that in the past, MM and Jauron, 3 years and out, didn't work. The biggest problem with what you just said is nobody knew if Harbaugh would be this good. It's hit or miss, plenty of college coaches have tried and failed. What's you point with this? You can't live your life with hindsight. Or are you captain hindisight?

I said more than 3, at least one more year. Lets stop this incessant switching of coaches every three years. Its obvious, it hasnt worked.

Did you read any of my posts? The biggest problem with what you just said is nobody knew if Harbaugh would be this good. It's hit or miss, plenty of college coaches have tried and failed. What's you point with this?

Not a troll, rather a passionate Bills fan.

I just want to put my name out there for being in favor for continuity. I know this is not a popular viewpoint on this board, but I feel as though, starting over again (just as we did with MM and Dick after a few years) is going to lead to the same. Are we ever going to learn from our past? That does not mean some tweaks can happen, however, the framework of this regime needs to be maintained, if we want any chance at the playoffs in the next year. We will likely need to start all over again, and have those growing pains, that we're so used to having done this twice in recent history. I know some will point toward the recent history of first year coaches. However, to that I'll say, its RECENT history, and is actually the exception rather than the rule. Coaches generally do not fair well in the first couple seasons. So why start over? Give Gailey and company another year to get this ship right. Let this defense have another year (after having just changed back to 4-3) in this scheme, they've been getting better save for the last game. These are just some of the thoughts I've illustrated in other posts, maintaining continuity is far better for the immediate future than to get a new coach. We have the talent, lets see one more year under Gailey.

So you're calling me dumb? That has to be a COC problem. Anyway, I asked you to look it up, as in get a percentage, and I bet you find less than 20% of first year coaches are successful in their first year. Compare that to 4th year coaches. Then get back to me. Look man, we'll have to agree to disagree, you're obviously about the, "blow it all up" and hope we get a coach that can make it happen. Probably because you've been suckered in by recent first year coaches doing well. I maintain RECENT first year coaches, vs across the entire time the NFL has graced this great land. The recent trend is not the rule its an abberation and we're bound to have a rash of bad first year coaches. Stay the course, and lets see what happens. Intellectually, I'll run circles around you, you dont know me, dont be insulting by calling me or anyone else on the board a name such as dumb. No, apparently his point is that I am dumb. There is no logic to be applied. For logic to be applied, there needs to be a set of rules that are always true, and that's not the NFL. Things are different from year to year and things change. So don't label anything here as logic, that would be a fallacy.

Please tell me where I'm apologizing for Gailey? Did I say something wehre he's been the greatest coach ever to date or something? Do I sing his praises? No, I dont think I do. Why don't you go into the annals and find out how many 1st year coaches in the entire history have done a good job. I bet you'll find, more often than not, it takes a couple years to get anything going. Once again, continuity is the way to go. How are you so sure that the next coach is going to be an upgrade? There were many here who though anybody would be an upgrade over the corpse, anyone, a 5 year old kid. What happened there with your opinion?

Another soothsayer I see. What does your crystal ball say the winning number in the powerball is going to be tommorow. Please, PM me the numbers so I can win! I see you can so arrogantly see the future by saying that Chan will NEVER coach a team to the playoffs. What I'm saying, is that another year in the same system vs trying to blow it all up will not be any better. In fact it will set us back. I hear a lot of people try and retort me with the whole "lather, rinse, and repeat" argument. Well, I'll opine that it is the ADD generation that is doing that with the 3 year and out attitude. Will we learn from our mistakes or continue to pick up the pitchforks and doom ourselves to repeat recent history? Soothsayers are abound here I see

So, what we need is, another 3 years and out, because that's what's worked in the past. Its worked out after Malarky (sp?) and the corpse to give them 3 years and then make them walk. Fans like you are apart of the new ADD generation, no patience, that means no continuity, and no chance at anything in the next few years. Go ahead, wish for it. The short sightedness that you and many others choose to see, yes. You just don't believe anything can change from year to year, for whatever reason, teams can be completely different from one to the next. We'll see what happens.

Man, there's going to be a lot of pissed off people on this board when Gailey and Nix are retained. Prepare youselves, perhaps you would prefer the Mayan's to be correct over that? I think that's the only thing that will change things, they'll be here next year and that's for the better IMHO.

Wonder what illness? Has it been released, what it is?

That's what people say when they want to deflect the question without being able to answer it. Congrats brother, you know what I was saying but chose to take the smart arse route. So what I'm hearing you say is, you're in the locker room and know exactly what's going on. Am I right?

So all coaches and GMs, over the history of the NFL, have continued to stay bad with no progression at all? Interesting! That's news to me! Tell that to Bellicheck.

This is laughable, Pete Prisco "thinks"????!?!??! Hahaha. That doesn't sound difinitive to me. Good job.

I'll go on record as saying, continuity, even as bad as it has been of late, is better than the alternative. We cannot clean house every 3 years, that's rediculous. Give Nix and Co. at least one more year. Continuity is needed here. Contrary to what most people will have you believe on here, coaches and schemes can be tweaked, and get better. Wholesale sweeping changes the organization will only set the Bills back a few more years at least. Yeah, do you play poker? Hindsight is 20/20, and its laugable that people point to one person or missed pick as the whole reason a team has tanked it. There are players that end up better than what they thought, and players who bust. Its all a real crapshoot. Armchair GMs of course will say that they wanted Wilson, but guess what, you weren't privvy to all the information these scouts are and they believed he didn't fit as our pick where he was available. Tough luck buddy, don't act like you know more than these professionals.

Hey now...well maybe I could Its not about betting on it, I just was wondering if there was a definitive decision to show Chan the door, and if so, who did it? The name of the thread is misleading. Does somebody have a link?

I'm trying to figure out how we know Chan's a goner? Do you have some inside info or something?

The mathematics of having more players to pick from if you get a higher pick, I agree is unarguable. However, what is arguable is how much better a 3rd pick as compared to a 7th pick equated to a team or franchise turning it around. There are sooo many different variables that go into it and the difference, I can say with almost complete certainty (without actually looking up the facts somehow) is neglidgeable. That all CAN be argued. Now, if you're truly waking up thinking you want to Bills to win, and you're just doing this to look at what COULD happen if they lose out, there is no problem. However, I would venture to say, that some in this thread, just hope the Bills lose out and that's all. I'm pretty sure at least one of these guys in this thread, going back and forth with me, have actually said as much. To me that's not being a fan, I dont know what it is, but it's not a fan to me. Now that's my opinion and how much weight you give it, its how credible you think I am and how much of your happiness is affected by my statement. It is what it is in my mind.

Love the realistic one. It makes the most sense IMO. I don't want to start all over again, that's not going to solve a thing

Because you're assuming that's what's going to happen in the future. You can't know that, and his system is good enough to win with the players we have IMO. Great D which has finally come together and an offense that we've seen can move the ball. Upgrade at QB for the future, and we're set. Lets not tear it all down as I said. Back to the heart of the matter, what does 5 picks better gaurentee you? I'm sure there are plenty of picks that were after McKelvin that turned out to be really good NFL players also.

Well, why didnt you say that then. The way you said it originoally made it sound like you were speaking on behalf of all Bills fans everywhere. Could be a problem of semantics, but that's how I took it, so I corrected it.