yungmack

There is also this: a loss would push the Bills up as much as ten draft spots. I'd like to see them start the UB defense this Sunday.

Yep. Because Whaley likes him and that's the kiss of death for many around here.

Go back and check his record before slobbering over him.

The next major announcement is that his bonus is restructured and he's signed for 5 years. No way TT is leaving.

They just might do that and more.

Actually that would be Overdorf's mess, compounded by Rex's need to change the roster to implement his "genius" D scheme. If you have to diss Whaley, at least restrict it to the areas under his authority.

I saw the topic headline and just had to click in to have my suspicion confirmed. And yes, it was started by that master of momomania, MAJBobby! But of course. And now he gets yet another thread to endlessly trash TT as the source of all that's wrong with the Bills while defying all stats and commentary that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that whatever TT's shortcomings, the real pit of incompetece was the "defensive genius" now unemployed and the revolting defense he created out of an elite one. Welcome back, Bobby. We missed you for that 30 seconds you weren't posting.

MAJBobby, how many accounts do you have ?

You realize it isn't just the cap hit, right? You're on the hook for his contract even if the guy turns out to be a complete waste.

Believe it was a year, and only because they were left in the lurch by Marv. I understand he took the job at Mary Wilson's request, who took over the operation of the franchise at that time because she and the Detroit Mafia saw that Ralph was incapable of running things any more. I don't believe it was ever intended for him to be the long-term GM. In fact, he begged Buddy, who was retiring, to come in and help him, then used the year to reorganize the office and have Buddy overhaul the scouting department, which has been paying dividends ever since. With that done, Buddy took over the GM job for the final two years of the commitment he'd given to the team. He used that time to train up Whaley who Brandon brought in with the intent of eventually being the GM. In the category of "How Soon They Forget," at that moment in time the Bills couldn't get a legitimate GM or HC candidate to even come in for an interview. Some of them didn't even bother returning calls. Free Agents were avoiding the place, at least the ones that were any good. Hell, Buddy had to play hard on friendship to get Chan Gailey to come to Buffalo and nobody was chasing him at all. That's why it was a big deal to sign Mario Williams and why they had to overpay for him. I think that's also why they overpaid for Rex. I can't be the only one around here who remembers what a mess the Bills were at the time Russ replaced Marv. Today it's a much different story. The Bills are close to being a very good team and likely for a long time, and the rest of the league can see that. I don't think there will be any problems getting top candidates to interview for HC this time around. And that change in the status quo goes back to Mary Wilson tapping Brandon, and the changes he made to the organization after that, right down to shepherding the sale to the Pegulas. But, yeah, fire the bum because he hasn't been 100% perfect in everything he's done. Maybe they can bring Marv back.

Really? You can sign the Number One pick for a million bucks? Damn! Might as well get a baker's dozen while you're at it.

About Brandon, I don't think "almost all of us agree" he has to go. That option is only popular with people who haven't a clue about what he does. Granted, being a Bills site here, that could be a majority. But in the real world where I'm guessing the Pegs make decisions, I think they'd laugh at the very idea that Brandon has to go. It would make more sense to fire Whaley though that would be an astoundingly idiotic action in my opinion. But at least he is involved in the nuts and bolts of the actual everyday football operations.

For the sake of argument (like we need more of that in this thread!), let's say they dump TT. What's the cap hit/cap savings? Now let's say they trade up to get one of those "can't miss," secretly Wilson/Dak/Brady type guys coming out of college. What will that cost the Bills in draft picks? And then what will it cost to sign a high draft pick? The only way to guarantee they get one of those guys is to move to #1 overall. The current back up is EJ. It would seem to make sense to keep him if you're getting rid of TT just for continuity somewhere in the QB room but that would mean a new contract. So they would probably let him go too. That leaves 11-career-games Cardale as your back up to the "can't miss" college QB. Unless Cardale is knocking their socks off right now, he will likely remain the #3 for another year. So you need another QB to replace EJ as the back up. Who might that be? And how much would that cost? Would that turmoil in the QB room not be a negative going into the next season? Add it up: It will cost a boatload of picks to move up from #11 (minimum two first round picks and several others), the new kid will have a multi-million dollar GUARANTEED contract even though the new kid will come with ZERO guarantees that he can play adequately in the NFL much less come close to the offensive numbers the Bills have been putting up with TT. If he sucks -- and the three names put forward don't instill much belief in me -- then you're out the money, the draft picks and probably out of the playoffs for another couple of years minimum. On the other hand, you could stick with TT for another year for a price that, while it's not cheap, is about right for where he is in the rankings, expend your draft picks on the D, and await next year's draft, when the QB class seems to be much better. New HC with the right D coordinator, holes plugged, and the O matching at least this year's effort right down to the inadequacies and you have an easy 10 or 11 win season IMO. I'll take that in a heart beat for a "transition" year.

This was exactly the reasoning that got us EJ.

Passing stats are nice I suppose. But the stat that is most important is Points Scored. And the team that scores the most gets the win. Imagine that. The Bills O has proven it is more than capable of putting up points, enough to win the majority of games if only the D was even middle of the pack. So the D is the problem and your only solution - endlessly reiterated - is "get rid of the QB." Brilliant.

I called it a "so-so" offense largely because it appears that many posters believe that it is. Was pointing out that this offense, even if mediocre (which it is not) is not the problem, and thus neither is Tyrod. Instead of this constant harping on him and his shortcomings, vitriol should really be reserved for Rex and the defense. That's where all the focus should be.

I don't think it's a matter of "he's not good enough" but one of "they're not good enough," by which I mean the D, the HC and his core coaches, and lately Special Teams. Go thru the 15 games played and it looks to me as tho thhe O played well enough to win 10 of them (the Ravens game still makes no sense). So it seems a 10-5 record with the hapless Jets left to play was do-able with this "adequate" O if only the D had matched it. But, yeah, let's get rid of Tyrod. Minga!

TT will have bad moments and bad games. After all, he's not Brady and I don't think anyone around here believes he is. But is he a bottom of the barrel waste of space as some continue to argue? Hardly. I for one would take him over half the starters in the league while actively looking to improve to the Brady level. I certainly wouldn't replace him with any of the QBs likely to he available this off season. That would be insane.

There is a difference between having a so-so situation and having a problem. The O is so-so, the D is a problem. The team can live and even flourish to a degree with a so-so O but it can not win with a problematic D. The sole focus this off season has to be on the D, either improving the personnel or, more likely, improving the coaching. An improved D that comes close to matching the O's league standing makes for a much more successful team overall. So what do you lose without having TT? You lose that so-so offense. The only possible replacement in-house is a kd with 11(!) collegiate starts, one who was benched. From the outside there are a bunch of bums, mediocrities and washed up vets. There are no candidates in the draft who rise to TT's level. Because of his elusiveness combined with his ability to go long, defenses are schizophrenic and tentative. This opens up the run game in general, making it more lethal than with a more traditional QB. It also makes the line appear to be better than it possibly is otherwise. And getting rid of TT means there will be more turnovers which are among the most significant factors in losing games. But you already know these things as they have been brought to your attention in thread after thread after thread. You either refuse to accept these truths or you are just an old crank who needs to fill his life with endless trolling. Massive assumption that replacing TT with the bum-of-the-month automatically somehow magically vastly improves the passing game. God lord, you even beleve Brian Hoyer can be the one to somehow pull off this miracle! I sincerely hope no one allows you near firearms, volitile liquids or car keys.

Maj,this is your time of year, when it is all about the "Bah Humbug." Enjoy yourself.

Lynn for HC? Noooooo!

The term, "crunch the numbers," doesn't mean the guy simple sits around with an adding machine & a green visor moving money hither and yon. It includes the legal language, the clauses, the years in which the most money is paid, the duration, etc. It may be that trading for a player, which involves serious "number crunching," is handed over to him to make the dollars work, but I doubt he initiates it. That decision is made by the coach and GM, with input, I suspect, by scouts, ownership and, yes, Overdorf. If anyone around here thinks he's free to trade any player he wants on his own, you're too deep into the egg nog. As to Mario's deal, have we forgotten just how undesirable a destination the Bills (& Buffalo for that matter) was at that time? Maybe Dallas or some other teams can demand more ownership-friendly terms but the Bills simply aren't in that position. The same applies to Dareus. If you want them,you have to accede to their terms. Buffalo is always starting behind the 8 ball. That the Bills have managed to bring in so many productive players, and to keep many of them, is a testament to the ability of Whaley, Monos and Overdorf.

Talk about impatience, I saw an item in the LA Times today where it was asked if Goff was this generation's Ryan Leaf. Wow.

Seriously? Now it's Overdorf who has to go? Do you know how a football organization operates? Or any business? What's next? The towel boy's gotta go? Ay caramba! This place gets daffier by the day.

What, to you, is a "fair chance"? The guy now has had years as a head coach for evaluation which any unbiased observer has to admit is nothing if not mediocre. We also have years of his defenders making the excuses that he's had bad GMs, that injuries undermined otherwise great teams, that ownership was never fully supportive, etc. At some point, don't we have to acknowledge that maybe it's not the GMs, not the injuries, not the ownership that's "conspiring" to keep Rex from his rightful place as one of the greatest HCs of all time but Rex himself who's the cause of this endless history of mediocrity? At some point, the unbiased observer has to "fish or cut bait." In my opinion, Rex has had far more of a "fair chance" than most HCs would ever get. The only HC who's had more of a "fair chance" than Ryan is Jeff Fisher, another guy who was always going to get everything clicking just as soon as he had the right GM, the right players, the franchise QB, ad infinitum. Time to send Rex out to pasture with him.