BringBackOrton

No. They can all finger point at each other. Rex can say Doug didn't get me my players. Doug can say Rex's coaches suck. etc etc etc. IMO, a clear hierarchy makes much more sense. If the GM hired the coach, he's on the hook for how that coach performs. Terry has to make the call on who to trust when they blame each other. And he doesn't have the acumen. Sets himself up for trouble.

Finger pointing. Lack of unilateral direction. The basics.

Thank you. Clearly we're in a quagmire now, because there's finger-pointing. But the root of all of this was the Pegula's call to go with Rex. And they should shoulder some of the blame for the dysfunction that resulted thereof.

No. I am suggesting they never should have hired him.

I don't understand your question. I don't think you need any years. I think it's a bad to have owners disregard the top choices of their top football lieutenants. I don't need any amount of time to come up with that opinion. Don't you? That doesn't change that I'm glad the team is still in Buffalo. Of course. We all have different opinions. But if someone thinks the Pegulas have made a grave error, I don't expect fans to bite their tongue and bow down.

Do you need 2 years to determine if not hiring your GM's top choice as HC and instead making their own uneducated choice is a bad move?

That's a simplistic conflation of the issue. You can be glad Pegula bought the team and kept it in Buffalo and be critical of his ownership style and perceived missteps.

We are 19th in YPG and 24th in YPP, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from.

It's a simple matter of talent evaluation. "How has the top half of the league done in acquiring talent in the last 3 years? How has our GM done?" If he has been in the top 15, he's good. If not, why keep him around? A GM that cannot acquire talent at the same rate as the league average is detrimental to the team. I see no reason to give an employee another draft if he's shown he can't keep up. Although you do raise a good point. Another thing the top football man should have are criteria that are grounds for firing. If the GM whiffs on 50% or more of his 1st and 2nd round picks, reevaluate. If the DC finishes with a top 20 unit two years in a row, reevaluate. If the OC takes a previously top 12 unit and it drops to 24th or worse after one year, reevaluate.

The owners should hire one man who unilaterally acts as GM or President of the team, with a clear vision of HC targets, offensive and defensive schemes congruent with both current and future talent, drafting philosophy, and general idea on how to build a winning team. He then hires an HC, and maybe even a GM (if he doesn't already de facto hold that position.) These hires will be interviewed extensively to ensure that they match the philosophy of the head football guy. Then you target OC's and DC's who are also congruent with the standard philosophy. Then you talk to the players, you explain what you're doing, why you're doing it, and what you expect to see. HC gets 3 years. GM (if not the acting president) gets 3. President gets 5-6. Basically, he gets a single mulligan on his choices. That's the extent of the owner's involvement. Hire a guy with a coherent plan and let him sink or swim.

The logic of firing Roman because of the poor start this season would also support benching TT.

No rope for the success of last season?

You can criticize Luck for being turnover-prone while also being cognizant that he's a pretty good QB when healthy, makes the postseason every year he plays, and competes in the postseason. He definitely isn't perfect, and he has been turnover happy in the postseason. I agree with your take in terms of "rawness." I didn't realize that's what you meant with your original post.

That's just not true. Some old threads from around the time of the hire paint a very different picture.

TT led the offense to 17 points today during meaningful minutes. Not sure that's good enough.

That doesn't sound like a brief description of the role of a AC. Not trying to nitpick, just thought it was a little early to jump to conclusions on what his role will be and you seemed pretty certain.

LETS GET FIRED UP! THE BUFFoons ARE BACK TOGETHER AGAIN!

Just seems pretty knee jerk to say what Rob's role will be on the defense. All we know definitively from the organization is that he is our new "Assistant HC/Defense". For all we know he is bringing over some his New Orleans hidden gem packages to implement. After all, Rex said his brother is a genius. Highly doubt the genius (and brother) takes a backseat and let's Rex run the show.

And you know that's his role how?

Touché.

Really? You need stats to prove Rob is a bad hire? Look no further.... http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/111564/saints-defense-making-history-in-the-worst-way Also- factor in the Dallas fiasco, his hire is pathetic. Didn't realize the Bills were in the feel good business of helpin' a brother out. Let's just hope the hire was to give Rob a place to sleep and eat.

Yes, coached the backs that led the league in rushing. That's something. Rob has done nothing.

I think the bigger question is how does a competent owner (Pegula) let this happen and approve of this? Rob Ryan has proved absolutely NOTHING to warrant an assistant HC title.

Mike Krzyzewski... just as a motivator and disciplinarian. Could hire the OC, DC, and staff to handle the X's and O's.

Denver. Would love to see Peyton get another ring. Also Seattle, Fred