DrDawkinstein Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 Why does the hole have to be Black? Is it the next Jamarcuss Russell/Vince Young? King is racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted April 11, 2011 Author Share Posted April 11, 2011 I very easily could be wrong, but I don't think that King meant the term as a slight to the organization. Folks here are interpreting it the wrong way (IMO)... I didn't mean it as a negative at all. I really don't care whether or not Buddy or Chan are dishing out juicy off-the-record tidbits to the NFL blogosphere. I just think the disconnect between these 21st century techno-geeks like Jason LaConfora and an old-school good ol' boy like Buddy Nix is amusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 I didn't mean it as a negative at all. I really don't care whether or not Buddy or Chan are dishing out juicy off-the-record tidbits to the NFL blogosphere. I just think the disconnect between these 21st century techno-geeks like Jason LaConfora and an old-school good ol' boy like Buddy Nix is amusing. I know, that's just the direction some here have taken things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 This is a good situation. The Bills are in prime position with #3 and #34 so why shoudl they let on about their strategy? With those two picks they should be able to get difference makers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPicc2114 Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 "Hmmm, I took black hole to mean they don’t know what they are doing." Thats what I thought too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 It was meant as a compliment. I'm not all that impressed with either of them but when they do something right, as they appear to be doing by not "telegraphing" their pick, I'm ready to give them credit. Hell..If they get nine wins next year I'll rethink whether I'm a fan or not. You base being a fan on number of wins? Does this change from week to week or year to year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 You base being a fan on number of wins? Does this change from week to week or year to year? No…TB mentioned 9 wins last year too…he wants the Bills to be a winning team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkKelso'sHelmet Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 (edited) Of course. He was simply saying there is no information coming into or out of OBD. This is neither a good nor a bad thing -- it just is. It's a good thing if the other teams have no idea which way the Bills are leaning, that's for sure... But who cares if the media have reliable information or not... Furthermore, King could have written this about any other team: i.e., "team X is not telegraphing its draft plans this year..." It's not clear to me how anyone can interpret King's comment as in any way negative, or positive... I very easily could be wrong, but I don't think that King meant the term as a slight to the organization. Folks here are interpreting it the wrong way (IMO)... Edited April 11, 2011 by applescruff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastRochBillsfan Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 Hmmm, I took black hole to mean they don’t know what they are doing. Of course you would. PTR He's very consistent in his Bills bashing, I'll give that to him. ........just wait till we pick Von Miller and see what spews forth. Exactly - as you are indicating - this is a bad thing for the Bills why??? But, as per usual, we see at least half the posters here somehow twisting the fact that Nix is keeping the media out of the loop into Nix himself is out of the loop. That's just the weird messed-up psychology of the Bills fanbase. Nothing new, of course. Nothing new. But it sure is getting old. I very easily could be wrong, but I don't think that King meant the term as a slight to the organization. Folks here are interpreting it the wrong way (IMO)... I'm with you. It was definitely a compliment. I don't know how anyone could interperet it otherwise. The same old negative nancies find a way of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 "Hmmm, I took black hole to mean they don’t know what they are doing." Thats what I thought too that would be the Negative thing to do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 He's very consistent in his Bills bashing, I'll give that to him. ........just wait till we pick Von Miller and see what spews forth. Nothing new. But it sure is getting old. I'm with you. It was definitely a compliment. I don't know how anyone could interperet it otherwise. The same old negative nancies find a way of course. Not to mention the fact that it would be totally out of P.K.'s character and style as a writer to make such a back-handed criticism...most of his criticisms are pretty direct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 I very easily could be wrong, but I don't think that King meant the term as a slight to the organization. Folks here are interpreting it the wrong way (IMO)... Oh we aren't. Just one person is. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 You base being a fan on number of wins? Does this change from week to week or year to year? I'm not basing a fan (I've been one since 1960...you? I'm basing my nine wins on whether Gailey and Nix are worth keeping. Gailey and Nix aren't the Buffalo Bills. They are two guys the Bills hired who have the obligation to turn this thing around. They should have gotten nine wins this year, and I'm okay with giving them a second year to show something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cincinnati Kid Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 A coach needs 4 of his own drafts to get it right. If after 4 off seasons the team still sucks, its the coach and GM. No doubt.. Anything less than 4 is tough. You could argue 3. But 1 or 2 is not enough time to get the type of players that he needs/wants in his systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 This is nothing but a good thing. Most good teams play their cards close to the vest. That's why mocks shouldn't be trusted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 You base being a fan on number of wins? Does this change from week to week or year to year? Decades of fail tend to color your perception of where the team is going. A coach needs 4 of his own drafts to get it right. If after 4 off seasons the team still sucks, its the coach and GM. No doubt.. Anything less than 4 is tough. You could argue 3. But 1 or 2 is not enough time to get the type of players that he needs/wants in his systems. Tom Dimitroff and Mike Smith put a playoff team on the field their first year together. Ozzie Newsome and rookie HC John Harbaugh did that the same year. Both teams did it with rookie QB's. So, the idea that you can't judge yea or nay after a season is not accurate. This is the same stuff people said after DJ's first two seasons, that he hadn't been given enough time. Well, there are subtle but obvious examples to demonstrate people aren't going down the right path to rebuild. And I'm referring to taking a RB 9th overall at the beginning of a rebuild who can't start for you. Nothing against CJ, but he wasn't ready at an easily to transition position his rookie season. A seasoned talent evaluator like Nix should know this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 Tom Dimitroff and Mike Smith put a playoff team on the field their first year together. Ozzie Newsome and rookie HC John Harbaugh did that the same year. Both teams did it with rookie QB's. So, the idea that you can't judge yea or nay after a season is not accurate. Oversimplification BillsVet. And not really an earnest attempt at being objective. Sometimes after a year you can get a good idea of the direction a team has taken. Sometimes you can't. The question is: what is generally a fair amount of time to give a new regime the chance to turn a program around? Just because it can be done in one season a minuscule percentage of the time doesn't mean that every new regime should only get one year. I recall how all the harshest critics of the Bills were pointing to Tony Sparano turning the Dolphins around in one year (they went from 1-15 under Cam Cameron to 11-5 in Sparano's first season). Of course all that noise has died down since the Dolphins have posted two straight, non-playoff 7-9 seasons. And your example of the Ravens is just silly. Ozzie Newsome became the Ravens Vice-President of Player Personnel in 1996. The Ravens were a stable organization with a recent Super Bowl under their belt when he hired John Harbaugh in 2008. Harbaugh was hired into a stable, winning organization. That's a slightly different scenario than the one Chan Gailey and Buddy Nix find themselves in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Oversimplification BillsVet. And not really an earnest attempt at being objective. Sometimes after a year you can get a good idea of the direction a team has taken. Sometimes you can't. The question is: what is generally a fair amount of time to give a new regime the chance to turn a program around? Just because it can be done in one season a minuscule percentage of the time doesn't mean that every new regime should only get one year. I recall how all the harshest critics of the Bills were pointing to Tony Sparano turning the Dolphins around in one year (they went from 1-15 under Cam Cameron to 11-5 in Sparano's first season). Of course all that noise has died down since the Dolphins have posted two straight, non-playoff 7-9 seasons. And your example of the Ravens is just silly. Ozzie Newsome became the Ravens Vice-President of Player Personnel in 1996. The Ravens were a stable organization with a recent Super Bowl under their belt when he hired John Harbaugh in 2008. Harbaugh was hired into a stable, winning organization. That's a slightly different scenario than the one Chan Gailey and Buddy Nix find themselves in. The Bills got worse last year, whereas the other two teams that changed regimes improved. I did some research a while back (can't recall if I posted it here or not) and the fact of the matter is that most regime changes have a net positive effect on the W-L record. (Remember, even Dick Jauron improved the Bills his first year and you'd be hard pressed to find a Bills fan that is still high on him.) This last Bills regime change did not. One can call it a subtle sign that maybe things are not going straight down the master plan highway; or, one can dismiss it completely and look for the silver lining. Either way, it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 The Bills got worse last year, whereas the other two teams that changed regimes improved. I did some research a while back (can't recall if I posted it here or not) and the fact of the matter is that most regime changes have a net positive effect on the W-L record. (Remember, even Dick Jauron improved the Bills his first year and you'd be hard pressed to find a Bills fan that is still high on him.) This last Bills regime change did not. One can call it a subtle sign that maybe things are not going straight down the master plan highway; or, one can dismiss it completely and look for the silver lining. Either way, it is what it is. the first huge difference -- we changed our defensive scheme. that almost always takes 1-2 years. the second-- these were teams were good teams that changed regimes after a season or two in the tank. atlanta was in the nfc championship game like 2 years prior to the vick/petrino debacle, and the ravens were 13-3 2 years prior to the switch. both rosters had more talent on them then the bills and there 15 years out of the playoffs. third-- they both got remarkably lucky with their qbs. unless you think clausen or tebow at 9 would have played like that i dont think you can compare the rebuilds. sometimes the stars align, more often it takes a little time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 the first huge difference -- we changed our defensive scheme. that almost always takes 1-2 years. the second-- these were teams were good teams that changed regimes after a season or two in the tank. atlanta was in the nfc championship game like 2 years prior to the vick/petrino debacle, and the ravens were 13-3 2 years prior to the switch. both rosters had more talent on them then the bills and there 15 years out of the playoffs. third-- they both got remarkably lucky with their qbs. unless you think clausen or tebow at 9 would have played like that i dont think you can compare the rebuilds. sometimes the stars align, more often it takes a little time. I'm not sure if what I posted didn't make sense or what. I'm not talking about those two specific cases that BillsVet posted. In general (read: league-wide and over the past 20 years if I remember correctly), a regime change more often than not improves the W-L record immediately in the first year. Now, obviously, one can trot out any number of hypotheses as to why that is, argue that it doesn't matter for the Bills, and suggest why the Bills of 2010 went the counter-trending direction. That's all well and good. Still, the fact is that it is more common for a regime change to take over a team and make it better from the word "go". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts