Sisyphean Bills Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Hard to really answer these questions for sure but I think it was a very awkward situation. The writing was on the wall for Edwards when DW was hired but he still was the DC. I think DW was more of an advisor and didn't want to step on toes. Plus given that it was 3-4, it was not Dw's specialty. I guess we'll have more answers next year. So not stepping on toes is more important than winning or getting players to understand their assignments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 You can't count on Merriman or Kelsay. You can draft a prototype pass rushing RDE, I hope. The Bills either can't coach the hybrid, or select players for it, or both. It's just not working, and it's been two years already. Also, I don't see how anyone can justify staying with a system that doesn't work when the personnel can't play it anyhow. There are only three choices. 3-4, 4-3 or hybrid. Good defenses, to me, need several different things working together to be very good or great. 1] Star players. At least 1 or 2 of them. 2] Very consistent, very good players. At least 3-4 of them. 3] Good solid coaching. 4] Good solid play-calling in game. 5] Good leadership from veterans. 6] Decent role players and decent back-ups. 7] Health 8] A decent offense that can keep you off the field, not put you at your own 10 yard line on turnovers and not always having to keep a team under 13 points. 9] Luck and good bounces. Kyle Williams is a very good player and could be a star. Marcel Dareus could be a star. Merriman was a star and it's highly, highly unlikely he will ever be a star again, but it's a greater chance than 90% of the roster. Barnett is a very good player. I think Byrd is a very good player. Aaron Williams has a good chance to be a very good player. We had crappy coaching but Wanny has proven to be a very, very good DC before. That does not guarantee success at all, but it's 10x a better chance than George Edwards. Wanny knows how to call defenses in games and has a lot of experience at it. When Merriman and Kyle Williams were in the huddle, along with Andra Davis, we had a lot of veteran leadership on the field and in the huddle. The team didn't panic or let up. They played with emotion and passion. They stayed strong late in the games and made plays. When they both went out, the leadership tanked. There was only so much Barnett could do in his first year on the team. Dareus was now the best player but 5-6 games into his rookie season. Wilson is a leader but this was his first year starting. They lost a lot from that and again, it is my opinion that was vastly under-appreciated. Injuries hurt us bad. There are a lot of players who are decent on the team but thrust into a more prominent role, they are no longer decent, they are over-matched. Without a pass rush, Florence and McKelvin and Aaron Williams were getting killed. Even though we didnt get sacks we got pressure early in the year. We didnt have health. Every team has injuries and has to play without guys all the time. We are just thin on the talent level and couldn't withstand the loss of Williams and Merriman. We hung on with them, without them we collapsed. The same way with the offense. We hung on with Urbik and Bell getting hurt, it was only on the third injury, when Hairston got hurt, and Levitre had to play LT (and then Wood out) did we collapse. We withstood Evans traded, Easley hurt, and Roscoe hurt, but when Jones also went out, not that he was all that good, but suddenly David Nelson is the #2 guy instead of the #4 guy and we couldnt get going. Crappy teams have crappy luck and bounces. I don't know how it works but it's true. Early in the year, we were playing well and the bounces and luck was going our way. When we reverted back to the Bills we all know/love/hate, we didnt get that luck anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 There are only three choices. 3-4, 4-3 or hybrid. Good defenses, to me, need several different things working together to be very good or great. In the Bills case, Edwards "hybrid" was a polite euphemism for cluster!@#$. The Bills ran the hybrid because they don't have the right players, not because the players are so versatile they can switch fronts down to down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Deck chairs. i get it, good one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I hate the Bills ! Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 I see the Bills running a 4-3 next year, with Kyle and Dareus as the Tackles and Carrington, Edwards Shep in the outside with Moats and Barnett in the Middle We still need to draft a pass rusher ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 In the Bills case, Edwards "hybrid" was a polite euphemism for cluster!@#$. The Bills ran the hybrid because they don't have the right players, not because the players are so versatile they can switch fronts down to down. Almost every team these days runs a version of the hybrid. The Bills played it because they were switching to the 3-4 and didn't have the right players but not only were they switching from the 4-3 but the Tampa version, with smaller faster defenders as opposed to what both Nix and Gailey believe in, which is bigger stronger players. If they stayed in the 4-3 they still would have to get rid of most of the guys they had who were not good and not the right type. Plus, their best player, Kyle Williams, WAS versatile enough to play both. And the #3 pick overall this year, Dareus, was versatile enough to play both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 So not stepping on toes is more important than winning or getting players to understand their assignments. I'm not in the lockerroom like everyone on this board, so I'm just guessing. But if you're at your job and the company brings in another person who has had far more success than you to help out, it is an awkward situation. I highly doubt DW was interrupting meetings or upstaging Edwards' plans. Just an opinion though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Ask and you shall receive: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ycn-7606072 http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/7/1/2251963/best-of-the-best-cowboys-defensive-schemes Excellent share. Not through reading but wanted to pass on a thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 So not stepping on toes is more important than winning or getting players to understand their assignments. You don't actually think it would be better for the team if Wanny was going behind the DC's back and telling players not to listen to him, do this... OR... after Edwards was calling defenses to say to the players, no that's wrong, do it this way... OR to have been given the right to overturn Edwards' defensive calls, do you? What do you think would have been a serious, reasonable, workable way to have an underling overrule the guy running the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 I'm not in the lockerroom like everyone on this board, so I'm just guessing. But if you're at your job and the company brings in another person who has had far more success than you to help out, it is an awkward situation. I highly doubt DW was interrupting meetings or upstaging Edwards' plans. Just an opinion though. Very much agree from a psychology and workplace environment standpoint. Not saying it's what happened but it'd make sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Buddy says they are a 3-4 team expect more dysfunction as they keep the 3-4 and hire Wanny as a 4-3 coach to run it Buddy has been drafting for a 3-4 since he got here - why would he change now? Keep in mindy, Wannestadt made his mark in the NFL as one of the top DC's over the last 25 years, with a 4-3 defense. The 3=4 wasn't working (obviously)...put guys like Kelsay, Edwards and Johnson in their natural positions, surround them with other guys, playing in their natural positions, and you may be surprised to find that they are not as talentless as their coaches makes them look. What irks me, this move is something anyone who follows the Bills at all, has been clamoring for...but they always say "fans don't know everything that is going on behind the scenes"... anyways, better now than never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Almost every team these days runs a version of the hybrid. The Bills played it because they were switching to the 3-4 and didn't have the right players but not only were they switching from the 4-3 but the Tampa version, with smaller faster defenders as opposed to what both Nix and Gailey believe in, which is bigger stronger players. If they stayed in the 4-3 they still would have to get rid of most of the guys they had who were not good and not the right type. Plus, their best player, Kyle Williams, WAS versatile enough to play both. And the #3 pick overall this year, Dareus, was versatile enough to play both. Every team has packages on defense, just like on offense. That's not what I mean. But most defenses have a basic, primary set. It is true that the 2 best players on the team are very good players and can be used in different fronts. That doesn't mean the Bills had the talent in the other 5 positions to have a shift front. The Patriots used a true hybrid defense to great effect a few years back because they had great and versatile talent across the board in their front 7. There is a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Excellent share. Not through reading but wanted to pass on a thanks. It's nice to actually talk some real football for a change here. Glad to share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wisconsin Bills Fan Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Having Dareus and Williams collapsing the pocket will make our secondary look much improved. If we are able to FINALLY acquire a passing rushing DE this unit will be much better. No doubt that linebackers will have to be added, but having a solid front 4 is a must. Look at the Minnesota defense when they had the Williams wall and Jared Allen. Not saying a Jared Allen is easy to come by, but if we could find pass rusher that could get double digit sacks this team will be respectable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) This was the move I wanted....and I am glad they made it quickly - You have to understand that there was no guaranteee that they even fire Edwards given the Ralph Situation - Even if they did.....we have a bad history of trying to find that young "lb's coach" and hope he steps up.....so there was no guarntee of a big DC name in that spot - Wanstaddt is PROVEN.....in nearly every year he has been in the league as a DC his defenses have eeither been sold or VERY GOOD.....that is what I am looking for here.....a track record of CONSISTANT success....... The STRENGTH of our team is in our DT's....that is where our BEST defensive players are....Darius and WIlliams should be playing along side each other. My question becomes what happens to guys like Carrington and Troupe......can they become solid backups for us This moves Kelsay back into his natural position.....he is at least OKet either in that spot....this is where we need to go out and get through free agency or draft a natural pass rushing 4-3 end.....this and linebackers still remain our biggest need. It doesnt change the fact that we need to draft linebackers......it just changes the TYPE of linebackers we need now......the LB's now need to be guys who are very athletic and can cover Edited January 2, 2012 by John from Hemet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Every team has packages on defense, just like on offense. That's not what I mean. But most defenses have a basic, primary set. It is true that the 2 best players on the team are very good players and can be used in different fronts. That doesn't mean the Bills had the talent in the other 5 positions to have a shift front. The Patriots used a true hybrid defense to great effect a few years back because they had great and versatile talent across the board in their front 7. There is a difference. I agree with all of that. My point was, the problem was not at all the switch to the 3-4 as it seemed you were suggesting. The problem was a lack of inherited talent overall, combined with the fact that the old 4-3 guys had to go too because they weren't any good ven if we stayed in a 4-3. So the overhaul in number of players was going to be similar either way. And if they drafted for a 4-3 instead of a 3-4, the same result would likely have happened unless they lucked out on different guys they drafted AND had already hired a coach that not only knew what he was doing but coached these guys well in games too, and didnt have his two best players injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Gailey: 3-hour meeting this morning with Edwards prior to firing: http://wgr550.com/Bills-Fire-George-Edwards--Wannstedt-Named-New-DC/11878652 You, sir, are a god among men. Well-played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 You don't actually think it would be better for the team if Wanny was going behind the DC's back and telling players not to listen to him, do this... OR... after Edwards was calling defenses to say to the players, no that's wrong, do it this way... OR to have been given the right to overturn Edwards' defensive calls, do you? What do you think would have been a serious, reasonable, workable way to have an underling overrule the guy running the defense. Of course not. Where did I say that he should undermine his colleagues? Talk about a ridiculous straw-man. If the guy is a defensive genius and great teacher, then why can't he work with Chan and George to improve the situation? What sort of job do you have where it is perfectly acceptable to sit by and let your peers FAIL in spectacular fashion because you're afraid your input might be taken as "stepping on toes"? Why hire Wannstedt in the first place if his knowledge was to sit in a jar of formaldehyde on a shelf? The defense didn't improve from last year. What did he do that improved the situation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Of course not. Where did I say that he should undermine his colleagues? Talk about a ridiculous straw-man. If the guy is a defensive genius and great teacher, then why can't he work with Chan and George to improve the situation? What sort of job do you have where it is perfectly acceptable to sit by and let your peers FAIL in spectacular fashion because you're afraid your input might be taken as "stepping on toes"? Why hire Wannstedt in the first place if his knowledge was to sit in a jar of formaldehyde on a shelf? The defense didn't improve from last year. What did he do that improved the situation? We aren't inside the coaches meetings. Maybe he gave Edwards gameplans/advice/etc that Edwards didn't end up following? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 I agree with all of that. My point was, the problem was not at all the switch to the 3-4 as it seemed you were suggesting. The problem was a lack of inherited talent overall, combined with the fact that the old 4-3 guys had to go too because they weren't any good ven if we stayed in a 4-3. So the overhaul in number of players was going to be similar either way. And if they drafted for a 4-3 instead of a 3-4, the same result would likely have happened unless they lucked out on different guys they drafted AND had already hired a coach that not only knew what he was doing but coached these guys well in games too, and didnt have his two best players injured. I wrote here on this board day 1 that switching from the Tampa-2 to a traditional 3-4 defense was a BIG change and would be difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts