Dawgg

LOL That's what most of this board seems to think.

Taking a QB in Round 1, great. Taking a QB at #8 would be a mistake. Fans would love it, but it would be an imprudent decision a hallmark of the Buffalo Bills' front office.

The best organizations are those that can successfully manipulate the draft to merge the player's value with the team's positional needs. Reaching on a QB at #8 "just because" the team neglected the position in prior drafts is not a sound strategy. The errors of prior drafts (and there are many) are sunk costs and should not factor into the decision-making in this year's draft. In order to rebuild this franchise, the team needs to start drafting the right way. If indeed the team believes that Nassib and/or Barkley has the tools to be a successful QB, the team should absolutely, 100% trade down to the teens or early 20's. Simply standing pat and taking Barkley/Nassib at #8, when either can be had later, would be an irresponsible use of resources. No argument here that QB is the most important position on the field. Moreover, no argument here that the team should address QB in the 2013 draft. Where I disagree fundamentally with those pushing for a QB at #8 is the notion that prior draft omissions should dictate the current draft. I expect this team to proverbially "have its cake and eat it too." Get the QB you want, at the right price and maximize the value of the pick. There is no reason the team should not be able to acquire an additional 2nd or 3rd round pick while still getting the QB it targets. These are professionals and that's what they get paid to do. Baltimore did this beautifully, when it targeted Joe Flacco and traded down when it realized that he could be had later in the first round. Knowing Buddy and the Bills, they will likely stand pat and take Barkley/Nassib at #8. That's why the Ravens are the Ravens and the Bills are the Bills.

Tim Graham? He who stated that he'd take Trend Edwards over Jay Cutler?

eh. I was done with him after seeing that retarded, self-serving TD celebration he did with his (hot) cheerleader girlfriend when his team was getting blown out on the road in Dallas. give me a guy with a little less skill and a burning competitive fire and I'll take him any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Roman Phifer

I'll answer that softball (to the poster who ironically was in favor of the Bills not resigning Pat Williams). Because the Bills used the #8 pick on Lil Donte, they traded back into the first round to address the DT position and reached bigtime on Jon McCargo who ended up becoming one of the all-time draft busts in Buffalo Bills history (and that's a long, esteemed list). In moving up, they swapped their high 2nd round pick and gave up a high 3rd rounder. There were a number of solid interior linemen available that would have helped address the OL situation.

Fair enough. Lovie's firing is a matter of opinion and the reasons you state are valid. I think that the reasons not to fire him are valid too. Marvin Lewis and Tomlin are great examples that other teams ought to follow. The point is that these examples are few and far between. Perhaps part of it is that black coaches have skewed toward the defensive side of the ball and the trend now is to hire offensive coordinators. Ultimately, though, I think guys like Fewell deserve an opportunity and hope that they get it.

You would. Perhaps I would too. But in the NFL, it JUST... DOESNT... HAPPEN. Of course you can! The point is that white coaches generally get more opportunities to succeed (and more opportunities to fail) than their black counterparts. Lovie had to produce big-time in order to justify his tenure as head coach, make no mistake about it: - When he took the team to the Super Bowl in 2006, he signed a 5-year extension and it was well-deserved. - In 2010, there was a lot of talk of him being on the hot seat and he responded by taking his team to the championship game. He got a 2 year extension after that. Of course the Bears gave him an opportunity and Lovie produced with that opportunity. On the flip side, how about Gary Kubiak in Houston? His first 5 seasons went as follows: 6-10 8-8 8-8 9-7 6-10 Yet he was given 2 contract extensions during this time, allowing him to continue with the team and has since produced records of 10-6 and 12-4. Not talking about quotas, not advocating reverse discrimination of any kind, just merely suggesting that black coaches don't have as many opportunities to be a head coach and when they are given the opportunity, they generally have a shorter leash, barring a Super Bowl or conference championship appearance.

Look -- you can agree or disagree with the Lovie Smith firing. I felt he got a raw deal because any head coach who posts a 10-6 record with that team in those circumstances deserves to return. You feel his failure to develop the offense makes him deserving of a firing. Bottom line: would a Caucasian coach get fired in a similar situation? 10-6 record, missing playoffs numerous team injuries, Top 5 defense? My vote is no. I saw that O-Line explanation from Emery - and while eloquent, it doesn't change the fact that the Bears didn't acquire the necessary talent on the o-line to produce a good offense. He gave long-winded excuses as to why they didn't acquire the talent necessary but it doesn't change the ultimate fact: acquiring o-line talent is the GM's job. Why is Lovie getting fired for it? The operative question is this: had the Packers won their Week 17 matchup against the Vikings allowing the Bears to make the playoffs, would Lovie have gotten fired? No. Emery would never pull the trigger. Ultimately, Emery was looking for an excuse to fire him and managed to have his way. I'd rather have Denny Green or Herm Edwards than Norv Turner, that's for sure. But that's just my opinion, which is meaningless. To your point, though, the reason your sample size is so small is that these coaches simply haven't been given similar levels of opportunity. Wow. LOL!!!!!!!!!! Thanks for that

Let me go over this real slow for you, that way you might get it. Tomlin coaches the Steelers and has a Super Bowl ring. The Steelers are owned by the Rooneys. Yes, the same Rooneys after which the "Rooney Rule" is named. They, unlike most teams will set a good example. They also have shown that they don't overreact, black or white. They have had 3 head coaches since 1969. In summary, nice try. The fact that you use the Steelers as an example shows just how clueless you are on the topic They sure did. Lost their QB for a few games and had a top 5 defense. It's not Lovie's fault that the team failed to prioritize the offensive line in the draft, nor it his fault that they lost a number of key players to injury. Bottom line: a similar season wouldn't get a Caucasian coach fired. There is such thing as a can't miss candidate, black or white. Numerous candidates, however, deserve a chance and here are a few: Perry Fewell Keith Armstrong Hue Jackson (had one whole season to prove himself and did pretty well as a HC) Ray Horton Mel Tucker

That was due to a well-documented personality conflict between GM and coach: one of them had to go and the owner had to pick. There was no personality conflict with Lovie Smith. He was simply shown the door because he didn't make the playoffs in a season in which he posted a 10-6 record despite injuries to a number of defensive starters and his starting QB. Such a scenario would never take place if it were a Caucasian coach. And going back to your example, who was hired as Marty's replacement? Norv Turner, a coach who had failed in 2 prior stints and for whom there were plenty of data points to suggest that he was not adequate head coaching material. In the NFL, it would be a virtual impossibility for a coach of color get a third try after 2 prior failed stints.

The point is this: would a Caucasian coach get fired after posting a 10-6 season in which he lost his starting QB for 3 games? My vote is no. Unfortunately for Lovie, he ain't white!

The new owner was not only in place when Mularkey was hired, he interviewed him.

From someone who is frequently critical of this front office: I like this hire.. I'd much rather the Bills take a chance on a first-time head coach with fresh ideas than a retread coach (Lovie, Whisenhunt) who is set in his ways. I'm not at all worried about his lack of play calling experience. He showed in Syracuse he knows how to rebuild a PROGRAM, a skill of which this franchise is in desperate need. Not to mention, having been in the collegiate game for much of his career, he can help this inept personnel department in evaluating college players. Is he a great gameday coach? Who knows. Is it a gamble? Absolutely. Love it.

Agreed. But he showed that he clearly couldn't take the heat so he got out of the kitchen.

Go look at that pinned Tim Graham thread back when he was here. After he huffed and puffed and decided to leave the board, most TBD posters were ready to jump off a ledge, responding with borderline suicidal thoughts I'm certainly not referring to those 90% you cite on this thread.

Most people on this board would probably agree, but not for the right reasons. Graham was an unabashed Buffalo Bills homer, so pathetic was he that when asked which QB he'd rather have when given a choice between Jay Cutler and Trent Edwards, he chose Trent Edwards. [Link] It's no wonder Mr. Graham is beloved in Buffalo Bills Nation, a fanbase that tolerates and lauds a poorly performing front office operation.

Yes. There's no harm in talking. Do I think Chip Kelly would accept a job from Russ Brandon? No.

It truly is appalling the degree to which Buffalo Bills fans have lowered their standards as a result of a decade of roster mismanagement, croneyism and a lack of accountability. Where were you these past 40 pages???

Oh don't criticize the front office because they did take a flyer in that draft. John Potter, a kickoff specialist Yeah, why take a chance on a LB, the weakest position on the team by a longshot, when you can take the safe route and draft a kickoff specialist in the 7th???

This is dynamic is precisely what the common fan occupying the majority of this thread does not comprehend.

And I love that! He was relentless in his search for a franchise QB. Nobody expects Buddy and his staff to be perfect. All fans deserve is a strategic vision, which Buddy has shown he lacks. Hard to blame him, as he's best suited as a scout and not as a general manager. I hope he's the answer. But as I stated in an earlier post: Whaley is the Assistant GM. He heads scouting. He, along with Nix, is responsible for the very dubious gradings that result in the ill-advised draft day decisions that continue to plague this franchise. The assumption that a Nix-to-Whaley transition will fix all problems implies that Whaley had little to do with the dubious draft decisions. Do you truly believe that? Do you believe that Whaley, despite working right alongside Nix, bears little responsibility for the shoddy decision making? I sure don't that but hope I'm wrong.

You're now doing what Kelly and other apologists are doing: picking at semantics in an effort to justify the poor track record of this inept, but highly entrenched front office. Relatively speaking, in the context of a full NFL season, 2 halves of 2 preseason games can be adequately considered immediate. Let's be adults here and not split hairs You are 100% correct. And who's John Schneider? He's the 3rd youngest GM in the league, hired by Seattle after spending 8 years with Green Bay. He brought a fresh perspective and new ideas to the organization and helped turn the franchise around in 3 years. If only the Bills would take a similar approach. Instead, they dole out promotions.

Agreed, and well said. I'm just not convinced Whaley will magically fix the problems that plague this moribund franchise. Whaley is the Assistant GM. He heads scouting. He, along with Nix, is responsible for the very dubious gradings that result in the ill-advised draft day decisions that continue to plague this franchise. The assumption that a Nix to Whaley transition will fix all problems necessarily implies that Whaley had little to do with the dubious draft decisions. Do you truly believe that? I sure don't but hope I'm wrong.