Jump to content

Buddy says "No Excuses" - what does that mean?


Recommended Posts

Check out this article posted on the main site here at TBD:

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-bills-wrapup

 

Here is a quick excerpt:

 

ORCHARD PARK, N.Y. (AP)—Buffalo Bills general manager Buddy Nix would rather wait a week before providing a detailed assessment on what went wrong this season, and how he intends to fix it. When it comes to sharing a general thought, Nix says there was “no excuse” for the team’s seven-game skid.

 

So the question is what is your opinion on what "no excuses" means. Following this organization since the early 90's (hence my user name) in the old days Ralph Wilson would want someone's head for disappointing seasons -- i.e. DC Walt Corey in 1995, ST coach Ronnie Jones in 2000 (though Wade refused and quit), and Gregg Williams after the collapse of 2003. Over the past few years it's clear that Wilson and his minions have let things slide such as allowing Mike Mularkey to coach after the 5-11 season in 2005 (he saw the writing on the wall and resigned), and allowing Dick Jauron to remain HC despite a very very poor season in 2008 that saw another collapse. For these reasons, I don't feel that Buffalo will fire Chan Gailey, but I do get the impression that his 3 year contract won't be renewed if he goes 6-10 again.

 

This leads me to believe that George Edwards will finally be fired and rightfully so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

prob that Fitz stunk and the injuries are not an acceptable excuse as to why

 

lol, you are stuck in a loop today, huh?

 

Yes, the entire 7 game skid was because of Fitz, had nothing to do with the defense or anything else. Everyone played exceptionally, except for Fitz...

 

Cmon man :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

prob that Fitz stunk and the injuries are not an acceptable excuse as to why

 

 

So you think he'll release the QB? Not likely. Whether we draft a 1st round QB or not, looks like we're stuck with Fitz on the roster for the next 3 years until the second out. I really think Buddy is setting George Edwards up to be the scapegoat here, but if he does fire Chan I will have a newfound respect for the guy because it shows that he's really trying to win a Super Bowl!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

prob that Fitz stunk and the injuries are not an acceptable excuse as to why

 

Its very tiresome to see the majority blame fitz. However fitz played with several wrs/rotating lines and Rbs and witht he exception of the high turnover he has been the best QB we have had since Flutie was in the starting role. People are eluding the fact the Fitz has put the offense in a position to win 5 of those games we lost. Hes not a superhero and its hard to win a game with a minute left on a clock as a case on two of those 5 losses. But the defense cannot hold any opposing offense. The defense collapsed in Cinnicinati, Giants, Second game of the Jets, and the Titan game. More imoportantly they gave up 49 unanswered points after having a 21 point lead, If you even look at the losses the defense gave up 21 straight points without a stop. Defenses win chanmpionships whichn is the reason you will not see NE winning ine this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think he'll release the QB? Not likely. Whether we draft a 1st round QB or not, looks like we're stuck with Fitz on the roster for the next 3 years until the second out. I really think Buddy is setting George Edwards up to be the scapegoat here, but if he does fire Chan I will have a newfound respect for the guy because it shows that he's really trying to win a Super Bowl!

 

I think scapegoat is too strong a word concerning Edwards...The Defensive Coaching was absolutely terrible these past 2 Seasons and no one in the NFL deserves to be fired more than Edwards...No one...It's not scapegoating...It's a smart football move... B-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it means George Edwards is gone, along with maybe the OL coach or something...

 

If Buddy had any stones and any real desire to make his name as a GM, he would fire Chan Gailey and bring in a top-notch replacement.

 

It's clear that Chan is in over his head. We can either do something about it now, or "stay the course" in the name of continuity and do it next year.

 

When you don't have the right man, there is no value to waiting a certain period of time before rectifying the situation.

 

Yeah, it would be a tougher call to make now than next year after another 6-10 or 7-9 season. That's what the movers and shakers do: make tough calls.

 

Its very tiresome to see the majority blame fitz. However fitz played with several wrs/rotating lines and Rbs and witht he exception of the high turnover he has been the best QB we have had since Flutie was in the starting role. People are eluding the fact the Fitz has put the offense in a position to win 5 of those games we lost. Hes not a superhero and its hard to win a game with a minute left on a clock as a case on two of those 5 losses. But the defense cannot hold any opposing offense. The defense collapsed in Cinnicinati, Giants, Second game of the Jets, and the Titan game. More imoportantly they gave up 49 unanswered points after having a 21 point lead, If you even look at the losses the defense gave up 21 straight points without a stop. Defenses win chanmpionships whichn is the reason you will not see NE winning ine this year.

 

Defenses really don't win championships anymore. Not unless they are historically good.

 

Green Bay, New Orleans and New England: three of the top SB favorites have two things in common. Elite QB play, and crappy defense.

 

Meanwhile, I see SF as one and done. Not because of their defense, but because Alex Smith is just okay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it means George Edwards is gone, along with maybe the OL coach or something...

 

If Buddy had any stones and any real desire to make his name as a GM, he would fire Chan Gailey and bring in a top-notch replacement.

It's clear that Chan is in over his head. We can either do something about it now, or "stay the course" in the name of continuity and do it next year.

 

When you don't have the right man, there is no value to waiting a certain period of time before rectifying the situation.

 

Yeah, it would be a tougher call to make now than next year after another 6-10 or 7-9 season. That's what the movers and shakers do: make tough calls.

 

In 7 years: Williams, Mularky, Jauron, Gailey...

 

Establishing the Bills as a franchise that gives Head Coaches 24 MONTHS basically guarantees that NO top-notch replacement would ever come here. It means they are already on the hot seat the second they take the job.

 

Who do you suggest Nix hires as Head Coach? Which "top notch" guy is available?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 7 years: Williams, Mularky, Jauron, Gailey...

 

Establishing the Bills as a franchise that gives Head Coaches 24 MONTHS basically guarantees that NO top-notch replacement would ever come here. It means they are already on the hot seat the second they take the job.

 

Who do you suggest Nix hires as Head Coach? Which "top notch" guy is available?

 

That's for our GM to decide.

 

I'll never understand the value of knowing you have the wrong man running the show, but sticking with him anyway in the name of "continuity"

 

What does that accomplish, other than putting off even further the chances of winning a title? It aint happening with Chan Gailey as the HC.

 

When you realize you have the wrong man, you do something to get the right one. Doing anything else ensures you yet another losing season, which will ultimately be a wasted one.

 

If you think you have talent, you fire the tired old coach, find a young up and comer, and you could have the 49ers next season.

Edited by TheFunPolice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 7 years: Williams, Mularky, Jauron, Gailey...

 

Establishing the Bills as a franchise that gives Head Coaches 24 MONTHS basically guarantees that NO top-notch replacement would ever come here. It means they are already on the hot seat the second they take the job.

 

Who do you suggest Nix hires as Head Coach? Which "top notch" guy is available?

 

I think the "top guy" he's referring to would be a big name coach and in order to bring them to Buffalo, you'd have to give them GM power as well. That means Buddy would have to resign or retire...don't think that will happen this year. 4 coaches in 8 years isn't too bad, considering a team like Denver had 3 coaches in 4 years. That won't keep coaches away. What will keep them away is the antics of Ralph and the front office over the past 12 years, as well as the questionable "desire to win."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hopefully, nix is taking the time to see which coaches are being canned in the hopes he can lure somebody and their staff. or perhaps he's been in talks with the likes of cowher or gruden or some other big name, but hasnt finalized a deal (or hasnt been definitively rejected)

 

the article mentioned nix is meeting with ralph. we can all assume nix needs ralph's blessing on any major overhauls.

 

please let nix tell us he's stepping back to promote whaley and that whether or not chan stays or goes, there will be a new OC and DC.

 

if anything, i think it's safe to assume there's some sort of major announcement. why else would you delay the presser?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's for our GM to decide.

 

I'll never understand the value of knowing you have the wrong man running the show, but sticking with him anyway in the name of "continuity"

 

What does that accomplish, other than putting off even further the chances of winning a title? It aint happening with Chan Gailey as the HC.

 

When you realize you have the wrong man, you do something to get the right one. Doing anything else ensures you yet another losing season, which will ultimately be a wasted one.

 

If you think you have talent, you fire the tired old coach, find a young up and comer, and you could have the 49ers next season.

 

Ok, so you are just coming up with vague half-solutions and not providing any real answers besides "Fire someone!"

 

And now do you want a top-notch coach? Or a young up and comer?

 

You can bag on "continuity" all you want. At least it has a complete answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so you are just coming up with vague half-solutions and not providing any real answers besides "Fire someone!"

 

And now do you want a top-notch coach? Or a young up and comer?

 

You can bag on "continuity" all you want. At least it has a complete answer.

Top-notch coaches LOVE to step into the middle of a trainwreck! They should be begging for the opportunity!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the "top guy" he's referring to would be a big name coach and in order to bring them to Buffalo, you'd have to give them GM power as well. That means Buddy would have to resign or retire...don't think that will happen this year. 4 coaches in 8 years isn't too bad, considering a team like Denver had 3 coaches in 4 years. That won't keep coaches away. What will keep them away is the antics of Ralph and the front office over the past 12 years, as well as the questionable "desire to win."

 

So just another yet-to-be-named character that we are hoping falls out of the sky?

 

And your bolded statement is wildly inaccurate. Shanahan was there since 1995. That is 3 coaches in 16 years.

Edited by DrDareustein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It means absolutely nothing. Zero.

 

 

G.M. speak = 0

 

:thumbdown:

Disagree very much.

 

WHEN Nix speaks, he's typically very honest and open.

 

I'm anxiously awaiting his next press conference. Big things could be afoot.

 

As far as the likelihood of a head coaching change, I think that possibility is remote but you never know.

 

And no, the Bills would not pursue a big time head coach. Even Miami with more money and legacy and location are not pursuing a big name coach because if you have a incumbent GM, it pretty much rules out a big-name coach.

 

That's fine with me. As Florio pointed out earlier today "Mike McCarthy, Mike Tomlin, John Harbaugh, Mike Smith, and Sean Payton were hardly well known quantities when they got hired."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's for our GM to decide.

 

I'll never understand the value of knowing you have the wrong man running the show, but sticking with him anyway in the name of "continuity"

 

What does that accomplish, other than putting off even further the chances of winning a title? It aint happening with Chan Gailey as the HC.

 

When you realize you have the wrong man, you do something to get the right one. Doing anything else ensures you yet another losing season, which will ultimately be a wasted one.

 

If you think you have talent, you fire the tired old coach, find a young up and comer, and you could have the 49ers next season.

 

Who says we have the wrong man? Who says we have talent? I see a roster completely devoid of talent. You have castoffs from other teams and free agent pickups starting all over this roster. That's not exactly a roster stacked with talent. We're building through the draft, that much is a fact that Buddy has stated repeatedly. That takes time, but it's the right formula for long term success.

 

Keep Buddy and Chan, get a new Def Coord, add more talent through the draft and some veteran defensive leadership through free agency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so you are just coming up with vague half-solutions and not providing any real answers besides "Fire someone!"

 

And now do you want a top-notch coach? Or a young up and comer?

 

You can bag on "continuity" all you want. At least it has a complete answer.

 

I didn't buy "continuity" in 2008 when they brought back Dick Jauron and I don't buy it now with Gailey. If you have a losing coach, all "continuity" leads to is more losses. The problem is that unfortunately there is a short list of coaches that want to work here in Buffalo, largely due to Ralph's decisions and the team's "culture of losing." It would be pure luck if we did find a good coach under these circumstances, but really what do we have to lose. We know what we can get out of Gailey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...