ax4782

I think that pretty much said it. And the fact is, Jauron didn't run the offense. Fairchild did, and it wasn't the one that he promised to run either. The fact is, the FO signs the players and gives the coach the product to put out on the field. The fact is that there were a lot of injuries on D, and had we been healthy on that side of the ball all season, I think we would have won a couple more games than we did. The Ravens did not have a ferocious offense the year they won the Super Bowl, certainly not with Trent Dilfer at QB. Having a very good D is what wins games and in the playoffs and the Bills have been doing that. The fact that the Bills were dead last in points scored last year isn't good, but with all of the changes that they have made does anyone really think that a repeat performance is in order? As to the original post, no, I wouldn't yank TE at the end of this season even if it goes poorly. I will again refer folks to the fact that Edwards' numbers in nine games last year were as good or better than many of the better QB's in NFL history in their first seasons as QBs. Statistics from last year don't prove anything. Before we start frantically finding reasons for why JP should get back on the field, could we just wait until the season is underway before rushing to judgment and addressing irrelevant hypotheticals?

Welcome aboard. Tonawanda's a great town. I still have relatives there. Anyway, I think the Bills can easily make 9-7. That would almost be an expectation from myself and many with the team we have, at least on paper. I expect we could make 10-6 and, if all things fall into place and a bit of luck, could finish as good as 12-4. Jauron's Chicago team had a 13-3 season with slightly less talent and even less expectations, so we'll see what happens. Just remember, no matter what you see here, keep up the optimism. It can get lost around here sometimes.

It begins again. I'll gladly spar on this issue. I would note that most of the players you have cited as being under Jauron's watch at that time were defensive players, minus a couple. Their D was always good, even during the worst years that Jauron was there. That wasn't the problem. Their problem was on offense where they had a terrible QB situation, a lot of injuries and Marty Booker and Anthony Thomas as their top two players. Not exactly a multi-headed hydra monster for DCs to fear at night. Our situation is starting to right itself as well. Our collection of talent on D is pretty good. I don't think we have linebacker in Urlacher's league, but the three starters we have are definitely very good, and Posluzny has a chance to develop into a guy with numbers similar to Urlachers. Here's the list of folks on the team now to counter the point. Marcus Stroud Aaron Schobel Kawika Mitchell Donte Whitner Terrence McGee Angelo Crowell Lee Evans Marshawn Lynch Jason Peters Derrick Dockery Others arguably make the list, but last year we had many of the same problems that his Bears teams did. Instability at QB and injuries on both sides of the ball. Again, I think that Jauron is probably on his last leg, and if he can't do anything with the talent that we have now, and we can't win 9 or 10 games, I think, barring a lot of superceding causes, he will probably be gone. If he can't win with this group, he will have proven that he is nothing more than a mediocre coach, but I say that I won't pass judgment until I see what the end of the season brings. I'm not jumping up and down with fervor for the guy, but I do think that he gets a bit of a bad rap for his time in Chicago where the situation and circumstances were not exactly conducive to a winning atmosphere. And the FO in Chicago after Jauron left made a concerted effort to improve the team which helped Lovie Smith, who hasn't really been able to repeat his "great coaching performance" of 06, continue on that path.

Edwards 22/28 235 2 TDs 1 Int Lynch 4-40 Evans 7-85 TD Reed 4-40 Hardy 3-25 TD Royal 2-18 Parrish 2-27 Lynch 22-100-1 Defense Schobel 1 sack McCargo 1 sack 2 INTs (McGee, Simpson) 1 FF (McCargo) And I think you will see some dink and dunk, but if that scores points I don't really care. Bills 27-Seahawks 14

Excellent point. I totally agree.

I think that perhaps you are a bit quick on the trigger here. The fact is that Wilson played better than Simpson last season because Simpson didn't play. In case you forgot, he was on IR from week 2 on. Thus, your statement is true, but the fact is, Simpson is a far better FS than Wilson. There can be no doubt that Simpson will be the starter, mostly because his rookie performance was overshadowed only by that of Whitner in the deep secondary. Second, just because a guy comes in and plays a solid backup role does not mean they are capable of being a starter in the league. I think DiGiorgio played admirably and may actually have the potential to start in the NFL, but not Wilson. Not to disparage his play or talent, but right now, he is a very solid backup for us and would be in the same role pretty much anywhere in the league. As to your comments about Jauron, you clearly put too much emphasis on what a HC has the authority to do in this league. First off, HCs don't "bring in players." The FO does that. The reason that they brought in Webster was because the previous year Greer didn't play like a starting corner. He was decent, young, and prone to mistakes. Not exactly what you want to run out there week after week against the other teams best and second best. Further, McGee hasn't been a CB for that long. Recall, he was converted from another position not that long ago. There was very little veteran depth at the CB position to help those guys along. Webster filled that need and he was a decent option at the number two and number three spot for what we had last year. That being said, the fact that Webster was set to be our starting corner should be indicative of the fact that we needed help the CB position in the draft, but I suppose that Jauron's suggesting that only shows how dumb he is right? I've said it once, and I'll say it a hundred times. Jauron, as of now, has shown no signs of being a "great" head coach. But there aren't very many of those. I have seen the he is a stabilizing force for an organization that has had a literal coaching carousel since Levy left. In the last seven seasons we've had four head coaches. That kind of "stability" is exactly what a young franchise needs right? And the fact is, there is nothing that Jauron has done that shows me he is a bad coach. We had a ton of injuries last year, and a team that, frankly, overachieved in terms of their record. There are a lot of good pieces in place this year and I still think, though Sisyphean made a solid point, that this is likely to be a make or break year for Jauron. If the Bills don't either markedly improve record wise or competitively, he's gone. I personally think that, barring a rash of injuries, 9-7 is very readily achievable, and possibly 10-6 or 11-5, just based on our schedule. All that being the case, Jauron didn't go out there and play and SF was the one calling the plays. And those players that you listed above. Only two of them actually showed up and played well last year. Lynch and the running game were excellent, as was the OL in run blocking. He showed up. Jason Peters is perhaps the best LT in the league, and he showed up for the 13 weeks he wasn't injured. However, Schobel didn't play anywhere near expectations. Evans disappeared, and as for Fred Jackson, he didn't get third down reps, because, like ML, HE CAN'T BLOCK!!!! That is the most important job for an RB in obvious passing situations; to pick up blitzing LBs, usually on the blind side. If your RB can't block, your QB is going to have a rough day. A-Train, OTOH, was a very good blocker. He made solid reads in pass protection and did an excellent job protecting TE in some of those more difficult spots. I give Jauron credit for being smart enough to realize that TE ending up on his butt more often wasn't going to be good for his confidence. You can say that's crap, but then you don't understand the QB position or much about football. The QB position is a whole lot of confidence, not only in yourself, but in your protection and blockers. If you are constantly worrying about getting hit b/c your guys can't pick up blocks, you aren't going to make your reads as quickly or be as confident in your ability to throw the ball down the field on reads and routes that take more time to develop. Finally, I have said it before, but posts like this infuriate me enough to sit down and say it again. Jauron has never been in a stable situation in his entire career, until this season and last. The FO in Buffalo is fully behind him and they have built a solid team for him to coach and put on the field. That was not true of his tenure in Chicago, and I don't even count his time in Detroit because no coach could have been put in the situation he was, with that team and done better than he did with the putrid talent he had on that team for the five games he was the coach. I do think that Jauron is going to have to sink or swim in terms of his ability as a coach this season. The spotlights are on. But if he succeeds, and the team makes the playoffs, and the they progress, I hope that many of the people here who credit him with every failing on this team, finally give him some credit. Likely, they will point to all the things that Jauron didn't have in his control and say that he still sucks. Completely hypocritical, I know, but that is the likely outcome. I hope that you will give him some credit if they do in fact win. That being said, barring injuries and other problems outside of his control (i.e. Jason Peters' contract negotiations) if he doesn't get this team to a markedly better place and showing on the field, I think his turn at the helm needs to come to an end.

I think you've got it about right. Barring any sort of catastrophic injury situations, this team has the talent to be 10-6 or 11-5 with a bit of luck. And who knows, maybe the Patsies throw out their backups in Week 17 and we sneak out an extra win there. There are a lot of reasons, IMO to be optimistic about the season ahead. That being said, I can also see the reasons that many people are skeptical about the FO, the Coach and the team as a whole.

Nice response. Fact is, people who like Trent find reasons to like him. People who don't, find reasons not too, such as saying that his yardage statistics when compared to other considerably good and great QB's rookie years means nothing and that he didn't show anything last year. Statistics are nothing but numbers. Trent was good last season in some areas of the game. Your point shows, to me at least, that he was a solid decisionmaker in most of his starts. That is a rare quality in a Rookie QB. We'll see if that improves this year. I like you, think it will.

I would not consider it an ad hominem attack, but if it was conveyed that way to you, I apologize. I try not to get into the business of name calling or personal attacks. It's just messy and distills conversation. That being said, I do agree that Jauron is not a "great" coach, but I don't think he is below average either. This is really the first time in his coaching career that he will have an FO that is behind him and a cohesive team that, assuming they can stay healthy, has what I would call above average talent. This is a sink or swim year for him. If the Bills stay healthy, and they finish at 8-8 or worse, I think this year was a failure and he will either be gone or on the hot seat. I don't think he is going to get much more time than this season. However, if he goes 10-6 or 11-5, I don't think it is only going to be because of lucky breaks and players playing way over expectations. Jauron will have to get some credit for it. That is how I see the situation, and it seems that you view it in much the same way, though we may disagree on Jauron's coaching abilities as they stand right now. But even you admitted that injuries to solid players have had an effect on Jauron's teams, and that is one of those reality factors that must be considered when evaluating the outcome, but in terms of what he did do and didn't do, which I also think you rightly pointed out. But those things have to be considered on both sides of the coin.

I think that last sentence of yours said it all. Jauron has never had anything other than below average to average talent. Counting his time in Detroit is a bit unfair, as the team at that point was in free fall and the players had totally given up. Considering that they were still competitive in any of those games I think shows the opposite of what you suggest. And for those comments about "he got lucky" in that 13-3 season, I hate to break this to you, but luck is as big a part of football as the skill you put out on the field, so to say he got lucky is really a moot point. In any given season you need more luck than your opponent every game to get to the Super Bowl, so I don't think that says anything negative about him. The fact is, this is going to be the first season that Jauron has a relatively stable FO behind him and a team that has above average talent and two years of cohesion. I haven't decided what I think about Jauron yet as a coach. I do, however, realize that realities have to be accounted for when looking at a situation. Whether you like it or not, this team is probably better than 7-9 last year, even with how bad we supposedly were, if we aren't starting PS players and third stringers in some cases on D. We probably wouldn't have made the playoffs, but I think we could have won another game or two. And there was just as much luck going against us last year that cost us two or three games. Dallas got two lucky breaks at the end of the game, as did Denver, so perhaps last year Jauron was was just unlucky? No, it must have been that he was a terrible coach. By the way, you and Sisyphean weren't the only ones who watched Jauron while he was in Chicago and I certainly think that he: 1. Had below average talent on both sides of the ball 2. Had a front office in disarray 3. Had no consistent QB play and only three terrible QBs to run the offense 4. Injury problems on both the OL and DL during his tenure But hey, those realities don't play a part in the outcome of a coach. Because a coach should be a demi-god, able to control everything that happens, prevent injuries, make sure that all the players play far above anything they are even reasonably capable of, and make sure that every move by the FO is the best one.

Setting aside the sarcasm there at the end, I think you made a solid point. There are a lot of unknowns about this team and each person here evaluates the situation differently. Certainly, there is a basis for persons to go into the 08 season with relatively low expectations. However, there are reasons for viewing the season with high expectations. The only result at the end is whether one group gets to say I told you so or not. Either everyone is happy, or some say I told you so and feel as bad about the outcome as everyone else. The fact is there ARE a lot of questions that this team has to answer. But that is true after every offseason with every team. There is no guarantee that NE is going to be as good next year. Odds are, they will lose a few more games than they did last season. Losing a lot of their WR corps didn't help matters and they didn't really replenish. They look to be leaning on their so-so D to help them a bit next year which could mean a down season. Again, the injuries are a factor. If Buffalo can stay relatively injury free, particularly on offense, things are likely to go better. That is one of the realities in football. Other than your rag on Jauron (which is starting to get rather old as he is going to sink or swim this season in terms of his job anyway) I have to agree with your premise, that there is a lot of doubt about this season. That being said, I don't necessarily think the outcome will be as terrible as you seem to surmise. But then, we are both entitled to our point of view.

Guy, and thanks, barring any sarcasm there, though my sarcasm detector didn't really go off. I also think that you are a stand up guy, or gal, whichever. You post solid responses, and back them up with statistics, that, while I don't always agree tell the whole story, at least give people something to discuss. For the record, thin skin can be the going rate around here sometimes. You get used to it.

True that. I see Hardy getting perhaps slightly more than what Kelly got, but not much more. Say 4 yrs 6 mil. The question is going to be what they sign McKelvin too. I would guess there you're talking about 5 yrs 19 mil? Maybe more?

Yes, so many other teams had 17 players who started for us during the season go on injured reserve. No one is saying that Schonert is going to tear things up, but we do have a relatively weak schedule, and by all reports, the offense if much different than the scheme run by SF. I also have no idea how Harbaugh is going to do as a coach. He steps into an interesting system, but as far as I could tell, you were the one to make the negative comparison. No one here made any mention of it. Strange how quickly some are to heat up their coaching dislike/insecurity.

This is the most sensible post concerning the DT situation that I have seen in this entire thread. Many people just don't understand the Cover-2 system, or the issues that we had on the line. Triplett was not big enough or talented enough to play at the 1 Tech where he was playing last year, but that's where he was. Williams also had to play a lot of 1 in rotation and he isn't big enough to play there either. McCargo was essentially a rookie who got rookie reps but played very well in the time that he got. We were terribly undersized last year out there and both Williams and Triplett were playing out of position and getting pushed off the ball. On top of that, two of our rotational guys were only second year players, one of whom missed 13 games of his rookie season and most of the offseason because of a serious foot injury. That appears to be behind McCargo now and I expect him to be very good for us this season. People whine that we didn't get Ngata, but to be fair, he hasn't been that great of a DT. His stats for last year and career are: 2007: 63 Tackles 43 Solo 19 Assists 3 Sacks 1 FF 1 Pass Defensed Career: 94 Tackles 58 Solo 36 Assists 4 Sacks 1 FF 1 INT 3 Passes Defensed That is with 32 career starts in Baltimore. Compare that with McCargo's Stats in 21 games 2007: 29 Tackles 20 Solo 9 Assists 2.5 Sacks 1 FF 4 Passes Defensed Career 35 Tackles 25 Solo 10 Assists 2.5 Sacks 1 FF 5 Passes Defensed Considering that Ngata is an almost everydown starter and McCargo has had significantly less playing time in Buffalo, I'd say that statistically, if McCargo were an every down starter, his numbers would be higher and more impressive than Ngata's. He has just as many FFs, was only a half sack shy of Ngata last season in what was admittedly limited action, and has a higher percentage of solo tackles to total tackle ratio in his career than Ngata. That shows an ability to get into the backfield and make plays when it counts. So, I don't really think that saying McCargo sucks and was a reach is much of a statement. The fact is, his injury and limited playing time have had more to do with his lower overall statistics than anything else. When he gets on the field this year, and has more playing time, I think it will become very clear that he was not a reach and that he was a first round worthy pick. But, I'm sure there are some who will happily argue about the statistics and try and find reasons to say that the DT rotation just isn't any good and that McCargo will suck.

The problem was there was very little of his play last year that one can defend. I would say that he did play relatively well in the final three games of the season where he got some significant time. His interception of D-McNabb was pretty sweet as well. That being said, look at the names involved there. You really think that McKelvin isn't going to be competing for the #2 corner position? This is just some blustering and speculation at OBD. Youboty has worked very hard during the offseason and is likely to be competing for a spot on the roster. Don't forget, we need at least five corners on the roster for depth purposes, and at least one player will make the PS. Youboty is likely to be on the team. If not, he'll be traded, but I find it highly unlikely that he will simply be cut as a camp casualty before he has even really had a chance to show what he can do on the field.

I think that clearly demonstrates the continued philosophy of people on the board who know that ESPN for whatever reason either hates the Bills or doesn't care. The fact is, Schobel is better than the 11th best D-End in the game. Maybe not top five after last season, but definitely top 10. And Stroud not even making the list is absolutely pathetic. Maybe they just forgot about him?

Offense-Lynch Defense-Stroud The comments about Stroud are correct. If he sucks or gets hurt the D is no better off than they were last year. If he is even close to what he was for the Jags during the Pro Bowl years, this D could be headed for a top ten finish.

I think that was pretty close. However, I'll take a stab at answering your question in hope that the thread will keep moving forward. Buffalo overperformed last year, but not because they sucked. Buffalo was playing with a significant number of players on injured reserve, and our replacements performed more than admirably. Some say that we didn't compete against good teams, or that we were lucky to be in games and the stats show that we got our asses kicked. I say that luck is a huge part of the game in football. Maybe you can't count on 6 turnovers every night, but so what? That's what happens. The offense at about the level that I expected with a rookie QB coming in and the fact that there was no way the Bills were going to have the type of attack that Fairchild had learned in St. Louis. ML performed a little better than I expected for a Rookie, and the line played very well, but the receivers underperformed for a number of reasons, and with Trent still learning the game and getting a feel for the NFL speed of things, my expectations were low. The D was admirable in how it handled so many losses last year. True, we didn't have a solid numerical finish, but the D kept us in a lot of games that would otherwise have been far worse than they were, particularly late in the season. The fact is, for as bad as Buffalo was statistically last year, how was it that they were still in the playoff hunt, in fact in 7th place, until week 15? How on earth could a team that some consider to be such a pack of poor players who couldn't execute and couldn't discern their elbow from that @$$ some how manage to be 7-6 with three games to go and in the playoff hunt? It couldn't be that the coaching staff had anything to do with it, or the fact that we had a D performing at a level much higher than anyone could have expected. But the coaches had nothing to do with that. A lot of teams would have folded under similar circumstances. The Lions do it every year. But that wasn't true for the Bills. So no, I'm one of the ones who saw a lot more from this team last season than that stats showed. Yet, many consider those stats to be the true test of a great team. Well, in many cases they are, but do you think the Patsies would have traded some of their stellar stats last season for the Super Bowl. If you look at their stats in that game, they didn't look so great. Stats don't tell the whole story about a team, but for some reason many use that as a measuring stick for success and failure.

Your rant proved my point.

No one said they were. What's your point?

That was far from a guarantee, though I think his statement is a reasonable one. Buffalo has the talent on D to make it into the to top-15 or perhaps better if everyone really plays to the top of their game. And keepthefaith, do you know how to say anything positive about this team? I'm beginning to think you are a Pats fan in disguise who gets his jollies by criticizing the Bills.

I think you said it best. Statistics only matter to some people on the board when they go to prove what they want them to prove. The fact that Walker had excellent stats for us last year and ML had very solid stats running to the right, that doesn't mean anything. What matters is that he sucked for the Raiders the year before. Forget what he did in Buffalo last year when he played with other talented lineman who could pick up their share of the load. That doesn't matter. He sucks because he was bad in Oakland with potentially the worst set of linemates in the league. But hey, that doesn't matter. And, krazykat, the point I made about Schonert was never answered. Why was he out of the NFL? You clearly seem to think that his absence was relevant, so why don't you share the secret. Was it because he was a bad coach or was there some other non-football related reason? Of course those people who don't like him merely point to those facts and ignore what he has done here. The fact is in 2007 Losman was pulled because he didn't play well. I think the injury probably set him back and I don't think that the QB carousel was much help to his confidence. That being said, I like how for some people the decision to pull JP was Jauron's, but then here it was Schonert's. Who's was it really? Whoever the convenient victim is apparently.

Bill, normally I agree with you about a lot of things said here, but on this CB business I have to object. What was the problem with drafting a corner? Are you suggesting that after the horrible pass defense we put out on the field last year, and the fact that we struggled when we could only field one solid corner due to injuries that there wasn't a need to draft one. Most people stated that our top two needs were WR and CB and I don't mean people here. Most NFL analysts stated that. I understand your philosphy about building the lines, but Buffalo's OL and DL are actually in decent shape, not to mention the almost 178 mil in contracts the starters in those positions are currently set to recieve over the next few years. McKelvin was a good pick. And, as I posted once before, Buffalo hasn't really drafted all that many first round corners. Recently, we have taken a few, but historically, we haven't really drafted all that many. Lack of depth and talent at corner last year killed us and I think it was a good decision to address that in the early rounds. There is a sharp drop in talent with CBs once you get into the middle rounds. Further, Buffalo has had good success with developing later round OL talent, and I think that Bell is going to be another one of those guys for us. Only time will tell. Not to mention that I think the Bills are likely to go OL or DL in next year's draft as we are likely to finally be able to draft for value rather than need for a change.

As I've stated before, I believe to you, there were a lot of factors in Chicago at that time that were involved in that bad record, and one quarter of a season in Detroit isn't enough to make a judgment. Maybe you are right, and I have said that Jauron really has this season to show something, and after that, he'll be gone, for better or worse.