folz
-
Posts
1,287 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by folz
-
-
That was a nice arm tackle by Ellis to save the first down on the Colts last series. He's been in on a couple of plays already.
-
Buffalo News
Chan is actually teaching these guys how to play football. What a concept! Take men who have played football all of their lives and make them un-learn bad habits. This is nuts-n-bolts of the game. You cannot tell me this team will be worse than last year. Not even possible.
However good these players can be. Chan will get it out of them.
PTR
Keep fightin' the good fight Promo...I'm with you. This team will be better.
-
If we are going off history, there is a good chance our defense will be much better. Here is a good read on it:
Nice find Fingon...I had missed that thread.
I was thinking even 2 out of 3 teams being successful switching to the 3-4 would show those
posters who say most teams switching in the first year do not improve or it takes 2-3 years
wrong, but 10 out of 12 shows that switching the D to a 3-4 should not be an excuse for anyone
anymore as to why the Bills (in their words) are going to suck this year.
-
As to the original poster's question:
I did like that in Spiller's interview he quoted Gailey saying something like
"As coach says, it's a tough game for tough people"
Hopefully Chan can inspire his men as Marv and other great coaches do...
Don't underestimate leadership and inspiration...how many teams (in any sport) have
we all seen that were loaded with talent and went no where because they weren't
all pulling in the same direction towards the same goal or weren't motivated enough
to lay it all on the line. And conversely how many times have we seen an underdog
upset a more talented team because they were more inspired, motivated, working harder, etc.
-
You guys are crazy....
Talk to any player from the SB teams, or Bill Polian, or Bill Parcells, or Don Shula,
they all praise Marv's leadership and football knowledge!
Sure, he stunk as a GM, but really he was more of a figurehead in that role...
stop letting that make you revise history.
Sure they had to be a very talented team to get to that first Superbowl, but it was Marv's
leadership that got them to 3 more. How many teams have even been to 2 in a row let alone 4?
And to say that had nothing to do with leadership is just crazy.
In the first superbowl we lost by a field goal in the last seconds of the game. That's
about as tight as a game could be and that's against a Parcells/Belicheck coached
team (that we had already beat in another nail biter just a few weeks earlier in the
regular season). So to say Marv was totally outcoached again is an over statement.
Marv helped reinvent Special Teams...do you think Tasker would be who he was/is
without Marv.
I could go on and on...but Marv is not overrated and is totally deserving of the HOF.
"It is said that leadership is that unique quality which enables special people to stand up and pull the rest of us over the horizon. By that or any other definition, Marv Levy is one of the greatest leaders this game has ever known." Bill Polian
"That's one of my frustrations, not getting Dan Marino back into the Super Bowl, and Marv had a lot to do with that. They had a great team with great players. Bill Polian made it all happen when he hired Marv, and Marv's genius and ability to coach was just the natural fit for Buffalo." Don Shula
-
On the contrary, KC also moved to the 3-4 and finished 30th, one position better than the previous year....Just saying.
From Allen Wilson's Buffalo news article http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/article94267.ece :
"Denver's switch to the 3-4 helped its defense improve from 29th in the NFL in 2008 to seventh last season. Green Bay's newly installed 3-4 ranked first against the run, fifth against the pass and second overall. The Packers were 20th in total defense while using the 4-3 in 2008.
Conversely, Kansas City found little success in its move to the 3-4, ranking 30th in the league (It was 31st in '08).
Which category the Bills fall in remains to be seen, but Edwards has no doubt the move to the 3-4 will be a success."
So, can we agree that we have to wait and see...switching to the 3-4 (in the first year) does not guarantee success,
but it also isn't true that every team that switches has to wait 2-3 years for improvement. And I think one of the biggest
positives about switching to the 3-4 is that our offense will be practicing against it on a regular basis (since everyone in
our division plays it).
I am looking for improvement this year. I think a lot will ride on the OLBs. If a couple guys step up and play well
there, I think we could turn into a pretty tough D by mid-season.
-
Is there some reason he should change his "tone" to appease Bills fans?
I'm not saying he should change the tone for Bills fans...its his article and
he can write whatever he wants...I was more just noticing how it seems to
me that his tone towards the team has changed since he left this board.
And for me, an optimistic fan, it makes his articles less interesting for me to read
because they seem less objective than they used to be. Some might say more
realistic, but football isn't fun for me if I expect my team to lose every week...
so until proven otherwise, I'm hoping for the best (despite our holes and
question marks).
-
It was nice of Tim to say it does look like we're heading in the right direction,
but it also seems to me that Tim's columns have gotten more negative about
the Bills since leaving this board due to a few fans being rude.
You throw in the line about our LB coach never having worked in the 3-4, but don't
mention that our DC has been a LB coach for the majority of his career and was
part of switching to a 3-4 three times in his career.
I'm sure DeMontie talks things over with Davis due to his experience and since he is
calling the plays for the D right now... but don't make it sound like if it wasn't for Andra
the coaches wouldn't know what to do. I guarantee DeMontie is getting more of his knowledge
from his own experience and from Edwards than he is from Andra. Tim added that line after
talking about a quote from Kawika, but did Kawika actually say "DeMontie relies on Davis when
it comes to 3-4 questions (because he doesn't know)?" That's what Tim implies.
And who cares how packed and vocal training camp is...It's training camp. Does that mean
we won't be rowdy at the Ralph during games this year? Does it mean the entire fan base
has given up on the team? No. And let's not forget, last year was the whole TO show. We
had more media and probably more fans come out than would be normal, so to anyone this
year is going to seem quieter.
I'm not saying Tim has it out for the Bills or anything and his articles probably aren't that
much different from before, except in tone. I mean when you start out the article saying,
"Of any preseason prediction I can make, the one I'm most confident in is that the Buffalo
Bills will finish fourth in the AFC East," it doesn't matter what you say after that, you have
basically said "These guys suck right now." (Whether its true or not)
To show the difference in tone, he could have said something like. "Gailey is trying to establish
a new culture with his first training camp. He wants people to use two adjectives that haven't
been associated with the Bills for a long time: tough and disciplined. (that is quoted from his
article--then he could have said) I don't know that it will be enough for them to overtake any
of their division rivals this year, but the players are buying into it. The Bills do have some
concerns and question marks..."
The tone of the article could have been different and I feel like that changed with TG after he
left this board.
-
Thanks for the reports...much appreciated by us out-of-towners
"...working on play-action fakes, bootlegs, screens, and even slants."
Halleluja! Shouldn't these be a staple of any offense? How often did we see any
of these in the Jauron era. Ok, a few bootlegs while J. P. was here, and I remember
one slant last year to Evans that went for a TD, but God bless Chan for bringing back
a real offense. Now let's just hope it works.
Which, of course leads to another point in the article about O-line depth. I'm not totally thrilled with
our O-line, but I'm not as down on the projected starters as some...but if we sustain even
one or two injuries on the line this year, we could be in trouble. I hope they bolster the O-line depth
before we wrap up camp.
-
-
Do you all what to know who the true Captain Checkdown is?...It was Jauron.
How many times did Trent say last year, when questioned, I'm just doing what
the coaches tell me to do. And behind an injured, porous Oline, with nothing
resembling an offensive plan and a head coach playing not to lose, they were
telling him get the ball out as fast as you can. There was no time for long plays
to the WRs to develop and the coaches were afraid to call inside slants. And what are you
going to do as the starting QB, disobey the head coach? Well then you'll be riding
the pine.
Its tough to have swagger, or be "It" when you're losing, probably questioning
the game planning, not being allowed to show what you can do, not being allowed
to sling it and try to win a game, etc. And if the coaches don't show that confidence in
you, then the team starts to question you to, and frustration sets in.
I'm not saying Trent is going to light it up, or become the next coming, but I bet he'll
look better, be more confident, and take control of the offense better this year because
the coaches and therefore the team will have more confidence in him and he'll be in a
position where he feels like the guys will follow when he leads. You can have all the
swagger in the world, but if no one is following, it means nothing.
Now we just have to hope he makes good decisions, is accurate, and can stay healthy. But
I'm rooting for him (just as I am still rooting for Brohm, Fitz, Brown, and every other guy
on the team).
And Trent's new look made me think of Broadway Joe, the scraggly hair and the sideburns.
Maybe he can steal a little swagger from Namath.
-
Near .500? That's rich. 32-48 in their past 5 seasons and 27-37 since DJ was hired isn't near .500 Besides, anecdotal evidence does not support where teams will fall,
Every year, a team or two surprise and some fall off the table. Teams in their first year of a rebuild typically do not win much, especially those that don't have a strong starter at QB, are weak at OT, have no proven pass rushers, are implementing new offensive and defensive schemes (the latter of which does not have the right personnel), and play in a very tough division where their opponents are better on paper.
This is a 5-11 team from a year ago, and one that will be led by a HC who hasn't done the job in 11 years. That's why people are picking them to be near the bottom of the NFL. No one's saying some things won't work out, just that there about 10 things that must go right to even be a .500 team.
Come on BillsVet...
if the Bills won 5 more games over the last 4 years (that's 1.25 games a year), they would have been .500
for 4 years straight. So, don't make it sound like FightClub is crazy. 7-9 IS close to .500. It's depressing that
we are talking about being close to .500, but nevertheless it's not an outrageous statement.
And you make it sound like Chan has not been around football at all for 11 years. Sure it's been that long since
he was a head coach in the NFL, but he has been an offensive coordinator since then in the NFL and he was a head
coach as recently as 2007 (at Georgia).
Plus, we were 6-10 last year, not 5-11.
I'm not denying the questions that you and we have all raised (QB, LT, OLB, new schemes, pass rush), but don't try
to purposely paint the picture darker than it is.
And as far as ESPN and anyone who agrees with that ranking, over the last 10 years the 31st place teams have
averaged 2.9 wins a season. I just can't see how we will fall to only 3 wins with basically the same players now
healthy and with more experience (+ rookies and FAs) but better coaching. Yes, we have a lot of question marks
including the coaching (because we haven't seen any games yet), but are we really going to lose 3 or 4 more
games than last year with that mess of a season we had?
-
i dislike a lot
- a nobody at DC who has never been a full fledged pro DC before installing a whole new defense
These clowns have no more chance of succeeding than their predecessors, maybe less.I mean let's be real, Modkins? Edwards?
I'm not saying this should or will make you feel better about him, but George Edwards has been an NFL
Defensive Coordinator before and he had already been hired to be the defensive coordinator for
one of the top college teams (Florida) before leaving to come to Buffalo. So, I wouldn't say he was a nobody.
1991-1997 Coached in the college ranks for Duke, Florida, Appalachian State, and Georgia
1998-2001 Dallas Cowboys: LB coach
2002 Washington Redskins: Assistant Defensive Coordinator/Linebackers coach
2003 Washington Redskins: Defensive Coordinator
2004 Cleveland Browns: Linebackers Coach
2005-2009 Miami: Linebackers Coach
2010: Hired as Defensive Coordinator of the University of Florida Gators
His DC stint with the Redskins ended when Spurrier resigned (he was not retained by Joe Gibbs)
He was one of only 2 coaches retained by Sparano after taking over the job from Cam Cameron in Miami.
In fact, he started with Saban, was retained by Cameron, and then retained again by Sparano.
He has worked under Nick Saban (a Belichick disciple), Steve Spurrier, Marvin Lewis, Dom Capers, Dave Campo, Mike Zimmer, among others. There have been some articles saying he will run a Saban style 3-4.
Prominent names Edwards has coached throughout his career include Richard Seymour and Marcus Stroud (Georgia); Dexter Coakley (Dallas); LaVar Arrington, Jesse Armstead and Jeremiah Trotter (Washington); and Jason Taylor, Zach Thomas and Joey Porter (Miami). Former Florida now Dolphins LB Channing Crowder has referred to Edwards as “the best assistant coach in the NFL, period.”
Plus, twice in his career he has been involved in changing a D from a 4-3 to a 3-4 (as a linebacker coach--and
we all realize how important the LBs are in a 3-4 system and probably where our D needs the most help).
Sounds like a pretty solid choice for what the team planned to do. We'll see if he works out or not, but he isn't
a nobody without experience.
-
I'm not a Whitner basher, I think the guy is solid (although unimpressive for where he was drafted),
and I like his passion for the team, but...
I would start Wilson and/or Scott before I would start Whitner.
I really don't see how the team doesn't start Wilson this year, unless
the duties of the 3-4 are so different that Scott's or Whitner's skill set
matches it better.
But every opportunity G. Wilson has had over his career, he's impressed (well at
least me). He's smart, a total team guy, and he played really well last year.
I would start Wilson most of the time, but in games against teams with good
pass catching TEs or middle receivers, play Scott a lot.
Unless Whitner finally blossoms in this new system, under new coaches, I'd
be very disappointed to see him starting this year.
-
I have no problem with people evaluating the team, seeing holes and question marks,
wondering why they did or didn't make certain moves and then based on their opinion saying
its going to be a rough season in the win column for the Bills.
I also understand being cautious about what to expect from Nix, Whaley, Gailey, etc.
because we have been through coaching and GM turnovers that didn't work out and
sometimes change doesn't mean improvement.
What I have a problem with is the people who guess 0-2 wins (we had six last year
amidst a perfect storm of problems), trash players on the team (not evaluating how good
they are or not or if we should stick with them, but just throwing out personal attacks),
failing to recognize the talented players we do have (like one post I read that said everyone
of our starters could be upgraded by third stringers from other teams), etc., etc.
I have no problem being realistic about the team (even though I'm one who is optimistic),
but how realistic is 1 win? How realistic is "we don't have one player that would start for
another team?"
There is a spectrum of optimism and pessimism and anyone on either extreme is not being
realistic. The rest of us can discuss the issues, players, moves, coaching, etc. We can be critical
of the team or players while still supporting them and not attack them personally.
We're all Bills fans...but I think what people get tired of are not the people who aren't optimistic
(trying to be realistic) about this upcoming season or coaching staff or whatever, but the ones
who can never see anything positive about the team and trash the team any chance they get.
-
Hey Folz, can I have some of that "cool aid" your drinking?
Do you like Grape, Orange, or Fruit Punch?
-
I didn't agree with everything Albany said, but I did like his last line.
You can still be an optimist, like I am for the long term future of this team, yet admit that this year is going to be rough in the W-L column.Just saying your optimistic about the team doesn't mean you're a head case that doesn't see the teams
faults as well and expect them to go to the Superbowl or something.
I'm optimistic because I feel like a breath of fresh air has swept through this organization. I might have been
hopeful when G. Williams, Mularkey, and Jauron were hired, but I never felt like "these are the guys that are going to
turn this thing around" like I do with Nix and Gailey.
Do I think we will be a better team than last year? Hell Yes.
Will that show in the win column? Maybe not, but I know we aren't going to be 1-15 Johnny.
Am I still concerned about our OL, QB, and OLBs? Absolutely. We may not have the answer at these positions yet,
but the OL and QBs won't be worse than last year if for no other reason than experience and coaching. And no I'm
not just hoping for us to not be worse than last year and I would have been thrilled to have an all-pro QB and LT, but
that doesn't seem to be in the cards for this season, so we just have to root the guys we have on to achieve their full
potential until we can acquire the all-pros (they don't grow on trees). But they won't be worse than last year with all that went on.
Do I expect us to make the playoffs? Expect, No. But I'm not automatically ruling it out either and God knows
I'll be rooting for it till we're mathematically eliminated.
Am I looking for (and expecting) a more exciting team that at least shows promise of what they can become down the
road? You betcha.
It's just more fun (for me) to be optimistic and I feel like the team is finally giving me cause to...and this
time I don't think its just FO smoke and mirrors. I could be wrong, but how could it be wrong when it
feels so right.
-
Just a few notes to keep the optimism flowing
...Gailey actually prepares a plan B and C (unlike Jauron and Co.), ready to overcome the worst case
scenario instead of only hoping for the best:
On K. Mitchell calling defensive plays:
“Those guys have been in the fire so to speak, so you would like for those guys to be able to handle it as much as possible,” said Gailey. “Those veteran guys will end up getting the majority of that kind of responsibility on our football team. That’s what you want. You want your veterans to be able to do that. And in this day in age you never know when injuries are going to hit. You’re trying to make sure that we have as many people that can handle that duty as possible.”
Coaches expect players to execute better (unlike, well, you know):
"...the 11-on-11 segment had some spotty execution. So much so that offensive coordinator Curtis Modkins pulled the entire offense in for a huddle."
A Coach with confidence?
“You better have confidence in this business,” he said. ”If you don’t have confidence in this business you’re going to lose in a hurry. We have confidence that our system will put guys in position to make plays. You’ve still got to go make them, but I think we’re going to have guys that have some talent. We’ve got to make sure that they get the opportunity to go be special on the field and that’s what we’re working on. You try to have confidence without being cocky.” Chan Gailey
And for all those who say we have no talent, how is our secondary looking? We may still have some big holes and
question marks at important positions, but I bet there are a lot of teams who envy our offensive and defensive
backfields (RBs, CBs, Ss). And I'm starting to get excited about our young WRs too.
Kyle Williams. I've never understood the fans who don't think he's good. From day one
that kid has been a player and that's all we've heard from both coaching staffs he's worked with, things
like "now that's a football player". 66 tackles last year. In the radio interview (link below) he talks a bit
about the switch and some of the things the D will do. I think he'll be just fine in the middle. It's hard not
to root for him, he just seems like a funny, down to Earth kind of guy:
http://rope.wgrf-fm.fimc.net/Norton_Interv...iams_062210.mp3
And Eric Wood is back, did you see Gailey light up in the interview talking about him.
Keep the hope alive...Go Bills!
-
I hated it when they first switched to "Shout" because the song brought up other references for
me than the Bills and I felt the song should be original (as most fight songs were back then--even
though many were terrible like the Miami one).
We had a bad one ourselves at the time "We can make it happen, we can make it happen, yeah"
I remember the year they introduced that song, they actually printed a little music sheet in the
program so we'd all know how to sing it and all of its maybe 10 words.
Of course I grew to love "Shout" during the 90s and sang it as loud as anyone at games in OP and at backers bars
in both Boston and NYC.
But, I have come full circle now and feel that it is past its time and it feels like living old memories not
creating new ones. New era, new team, hopefully new hope...new song.
The only problem is we could end up with something worse...I'd be all for changing the song
if the new one was good. And we'd all get used to it just like we did "Shout" if the team started
winning again. The Bills have changed their song a number of times, its not like the Redskins
or other teams who have had their songs forever.
-
I was listening to the Lee Evans radio interview
http://www.wedg.com/goout.asp?u=/article.asp?id=1843584
and they asked how Chan Gailey's offense was different from last year's offense and his response was:
"I don't want to call his (Gailey's) offense simple, but its, you know, he has the ability to get guys in different places and you know, still stay with the same play. It's not an offense where you have, you know, you go into a game with two or three hundred plays. He has the base package of things he likes to run and they can mix up formations and personnel and do the same thing, so, I think that's good cause the plays that will be run will be plays that you've run over and over and over and over again. You know them like the back of your hand; and that's the kind of sense I'm getting from it and I think that will help, you know, even when guys come in they'll know what they're doing and I think that's a big key going into the season or down the road."
So it seems like Gailey's system means learn a smaller number of plays really well and then disguise them with formations and personnel. That kind of reminded me of the 90s Bills offense. I'm not saying Gailey will have that type of success by any means, but it sounded similar in that the players become experts at a handful of plays---like the couter trey, etc. back in the day---so execution is always at a high level.
And as Lee said, with fewer plays but ones that have been run over and over, if you have to play 2nd or 3rd stringers due to injury or whatever, their heads aren't swimming because they haven't had any reps in half the plays in the playbook for that game...they can come in and execute at least at their own top level because they're confident in their knowledge of the plays.
It also made me think that last season, with Jauron and Schonert, maybe it wasn't one of them being right and one wrong, maybe they were both wrong. (I'm reading between the lines here, so I could be off, but...) If Turk was coming in with 200-300 plays per game and the guys couldn't get them down, remember them, or whatever, then maybe Jauron was right in telling him he had to scale it back. But the problem with Jauron's scaling back was that with fewer plays, they didn't know how to disguise them, so other teams knew what was coming when they saw the Bills line up.
Could that have been our problem last year?
-
I stopped watching the NBA years ago (before the ref scandal) because it all became geared to generating
stars. A star player could hack a young guy or no name guy and never get called for it, yet when that star
player drove the lane on the next play and missed the bucket when there was no or very minimal contact,
a foul was called and he'd get 2 shots. Games were not called fairly and despite whether the league was
doing that to rig the outcome of games or not (which I don't at all put past them), the star treatment alone
made it unfair and took the fun out of the game for me.
I was a huge Celtics fan growing up and a Lakers/Celtics final would have normally had me going crazy...yet,
I haven't watched 1 game of these finals. If you want to watch basketball, watch college hoops.
Now, I never thought the NFL was rigged...sure the better teams might get the benefit of the doubt more often than
not, but like others say, you could chalk that up to human nature by the refs, not necessarily a conspiracy.
But, Super Bowl XL Pittsburgh vs. Seattle, Jerome Bettis in his last game before a home audience, etc. gave
me pause for thought. I do feel like the outcome of that game was severely altered by the refs. Was it a league
conspiracy? I have no idea, but it did make me worry that the NFL might turn into the NBA. And the wholes Cheatriots
fiasco didn't help either. But, so far it looks like that has been avoided (I hope). I still think the game has integrity.
But for those who think it is too hard to rig an NFL game, all you have to do is look at holding penalties. The refs
could call a hold on almost any play. A few holding calls at crucial moments could definitely change the outcome
of a game if it makes a team punt, knocks them out of field goal range, pins them against their endzone giving
the other team great field position on the turnover, etc. It might be tough to guarantee the outcome of a game,
but they could sure stack the odds for or against a team pretty easily if they wanted to.
I think we as fans (fans of all NFL teams) hold the burden of keeping the league honest, showing outrage if the
league ever starts turning in that direction and/or not watching, buying their product if it came to that.
-
Was Schobel that good?
YES!
-
If make or break means vets that either step up now or they could be gone, either before or just after this season, then
I'd say:
(Traditional: Guys who haven't stepped up yet and need to in order to stay)
Hardy
McCargo
Ellis
Maybin
(These guys have had some production but need to take it to another level or could be gone)
Trent
Fitz
Marshawn
Mitchell
Ellison
Kelsay
Youboty
Mitchell and Kelsay because of the switch; Marshawn, less about his production and more about his attitude. Youboty
mostly because of the injury history.
Not saying others aren't on the hot seat, but these are the guys that I would say are in a true
make or break season (at least as far as their career with the Bills is concerned).
-
IF YOU DON"T WANT TO READ THE WHOLE POST, PLEASE AT LEAST LOOK AT THE TWO QUOTES AT THE BOTTOM.
I can only imagine that most of the posters saying Levy is overrated, not HOF worthy, and worse yet
not integral to the 90s Bills must be too young to actually remember watching that team. He was the oil
that made that machine run, the glue that kept it together, and an overall great leader and motivator.
PLEASE, please do not let his 2 years as GM tarnish his legacy...Marv was a great coach, just ask Bill
Parcells, Don Shula, and others of that era that coached against him.
Marv was a leader of men, he kept that team on track, personalities in check, inspired, motivated, and yes,
well coached.
The Superbowls, it always comes back to he sucks because he lost 4 Superbowls...everyone talks about him getting
outcoached as the reason we lost. Well, was he out coached in the 123 games he won as a Bills coach? (that works out to 10.69 wins on avg. per season over 11 years). How many other coaches have been able to keep his team's eye on the prize to even go to 2 Superbowls in a row let alone 4.
And let's not mention that SB XXV was lost in the last seconds on a missed field goal (that close) against a
Bill Parcells team and Bill Bellicheat defense. Two of the greatest coaches ever and if Norwood straightens out
that kick, Marv would have beat them. Actually Marv did beat them, unfortunately, it was during that same regular season.
Week 15, December 15th, about a month before the Superbowl, the Bills beat the Giants 17-13 in another hard
fought contest at the Meadowlands.
Let's also not mention that that Bills team loved to party, even the night before the big game.
Washington in SB XXVI still seems like a fluke to me...who knows what the hell happened in that game,
I suppose it is as others said we just ran into another NFC East power running game. The NFC East (not the
NFC) was our achilles heel. We ran over just about everyone else. Our record against the NFC in the Superbowl
years was 14-2 and the two loses came in the last games of the'90 and '91 season when we were resting our starters for the playoffs). But the NFC East was built with beef up front and power running, which as others said was our one
major weakness.
By the time we get to the 3rd and 4th SBs against Dallas, our team had been together, basically since 1985/1986.
We started losing players to age, the early years of FA, etc. We were waning as all dynasties do, while the
Cowboys were hitting their stride. We were still good and had our core players (as evidenced by beating Dallas in
week 2 of the '93 season between the two SB loses), but Dallas was a better team and built to shut us down.
Anyhow, sorry for another long post, but it drives me mad to hear this talk about Marv. Was he a great GM,
absolutely not. He came really with the hopes of coaching again, and with Wilson begging him to bring some
stability and loyalty back after the Donahoe debacle. So, for Ralph and the franchise, he took the position for two
years...I think more as an ambassador to the fans and media and a bit of sage advice here and there rather than
as a true GM, which is Ralph's fault, not Marv's. Did it go well? Obviously not. But does that make his history as a great BILLS
coach all of a sudden meaningless? Hell no. Polian and Levy were a team...just listen to how Polian speaks of Marv
as a coach...they did it together. Throw in another coach (as some have said) and that same chemistry, never quit
attitude, special teams, motivation, etc. wouldn't have been there.
"It is said that leadership is that unique quality which enables special people to stand up and pull the rest of us over the horizon. By that or any other definition, Marv Levy is one of the greatest leaders this game has ever known." Bill Polian
"That's one of my frustrations, not getting Dan Marino back into the Super Bowl, and Marv had a lot to do with that. They had a great team with great players. Bill Polian made it all happen when he hired Marv, and Marv's genius and ability to coach was just the natural fit for Buffalo." Don Shula
Chan Gailey 
Preseason game 2 Colts @ Bills "Gameday" thread
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I'm a little nervous about the special teams too...
but don't forget, they're basically learning a new system also...
Bruce is a good coach, hopefully he pulls it together.