Marshawn's 20 bucks Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 They should fire all the coaches and let the players coach themselves the last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills Fan since '64 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I fully get the point of continuity. As Bills fan's we've seen front offices and coaching regimes walk in and walk on out and we've been stuck in this 3 year cycle. Coaching changes no longer excite me. No one worth their salt will work for Ralph Wilson and the last gm who did was pushed out for Marv Levy who made the whole mess even worse. The problem isn't the gm or the coaches. The problem is the owner. Just enjoy having a team we will never see the Bills win as long as Ralph owns this organization. 100% correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I'm aware, but that doesn't change my opinion on Rivers. His offensive line is, and has been, one of the worst in the league. He also goes downfield a lot, way more than Fitzy and yet he only has 3 more turnovers. FWIW...since he entered the league no player is responsible for more turnovers than Rivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobChalmers Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Really I am so split on this idea. On one hand I want Gaily gone so badly but Nix does make sense. I just think continuity should take place if there was hope of improvement. I think this current regime peaked at the end of the 2009 and beginning of 2010 seasons. I guess at least the organization is trying something new? http://www.buffaloru...han-gailey-2013 This entire article is speculation based on a Nix quote from November 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I support the continuity of getting rid of the bums after 3 years of losing and not showing a promising future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HamSandwhich Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I support the continuity of getting rid of the bums after 3 years of losing and not showing a promising future That's worked out well for us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) Did you read any of my posts? The biggest problem with what you just said is nobody knew if Harbaugh would be this good. It's hit or miss, plenty of college coaches have tried and failed. What's you point with this? Of course nobody knew if Harbaugh would be this good. But I think people looked at his track record developing college QB and winning and his personality and said "worth a try". Chan had none of that at Georgia Tech. He was less worth a try. Once we did try, it may have been worth finishing the experiment by giving 3 years, but the experiment is over. By the "nobody knew if XXXXX would be this good" logic, no one should ever try something new -- a high draftee at QB, a college coach with a great intensity and a good record. Someone said it earlier - continuity only matters if what you're continuing is worth continuing. Losing is by definition, not worth continuing. If we were 7-9 or even 5-11 but I felt Gailey and his assistants were getting the best they could out of the team and utilizing their best players effectively, I'd say go for it, we're just missing a few pieces. But they're not, on neither count and everyone can see it. Edited December 19, 2012 by Hopeful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 That's worked out well for us! Getting rid of 'bums' works. Replacing them with other 'bums' does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HamSandwhich Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Of course nobody knew if Harbaugh would be this good. But I think people looked at his track record developing college QB and winning and his personality and said "worth a try". Chan had none of that at Georgia Tech. He was less worth a try. Once we did try, it may have been worth finishing the experiment by giving 3 years, but the experiment is over. By the "nobody knew if XXXXX would be this good" logic, no one should ever try something new -- a high draftee at QB, a college coach with a great intensity and a good record. Someone said it earlier - continuity only matters if what you're continuing is worth continuing. Losing is by definition, not worth continuing. If we were 7-9 or even 5-11 but I felt Gailey and his assistants were getting the best they could out of the team and utilizing their best players effectively, I'd say go for it, we're just missing a few pieces. But they're not, on neither count and everyone can see it. What I'm saying, is there have been plenty of coaches that have had a "track record" of success. Look at Spurrier for example, everyone thought he would be a good NFL coach. What happened? Track record does not always translate into a good coach, and for the most part, new NFL coaches go through a couple of years of turmoil before they are anything, IF they will be anything. Sure, you can point to RECENT coaches, but over the history of the NFL, which people like to so quickly forget, those coaches don't fair quite as well as often as people like to believe. Continuity would actually be a departure of the same old same old at OBD, they have rinced and repeated 3 years and out, and it hasn't worked. Time for a change. I wasn't about this when it was Jauron, but now I feel we need to stay the course. Yes, things can change, and they do, often, in the NFL. Next year we could be talking about 8-5 rather than 5-8 under the same regime. Nobody wants to believe it, everyone wants to point to what has been done recently, but a coach can change concepts yearly and can change the entire complexion of the team by tweaking things here and there. A wholesale change is not needed. . Getting rid of 'bums' works. Replacing them with other 'bums' does not. For obvious reasons, I will not directly challenge you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 A lot of long winded discussion which I can simply equate to ham sandwich supports this losing culture.....ignoring the running game.....losing by 50.....no positives whatsoever w gailey. If you can come up with one that would be nice Losing is awesome.... Can I have some more sir What I'm saying, is there have been plenty of coaches that have had a "track record" of success. Look at Spurrier for example, everyone thought he would be a good NFL coach. What happened? Track record does not always translate into a good coach, and for the most part, new NFL coaches go through a couple of years of turmoil before they are anything, IF they will be anything. Sure, you can point to RECENT coaches, but over the history of the NFL, which people like to so quickly forget, those coaches don't fair quite as well as often as people like to believe. Continuity would actually be a departure of the same old same old at OBD, they have rinced and repeated 3 years and out, and it hasn't worked. Time for a change. I wasn't about this when it was Jauron, but now I feel we need to stay the course. Yes, things can change, and they do, often, in the NFL. Next year we could be talking about 8-5 rather than 5-8 under the same regime. Nobody wants to believe it, everyone wants to point to what has been done recently, but a coach can change concepts yearly and can change the entire complexion of the team by tweaking things here and there. A wholesale change is not needed. . For obvious reasons, I will not directly challenge you What is there to challenge ? If the next coach is as terrible as gailey then we will stink again...if the new coach is better then boom we will have some results and not get blown out every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HamSandwhich Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 A lot of long winded discussion which I can simply equate to ham sandwich supports this losing culture.....ignoring the running game.....losing by 50.....no positives whatsoever w gailey. If you can come up with one that would be nice Losing is awesome.... Can I have some more sir What is there to challenge ? If the next coach is as terrible as gailey then we will stink again...if the new coach is better then boom we will have some results and not get blown out every week. Your premise is that Gailey WILL be just as bad next year. I'm saying, thats not necessarily true. Agree to disagree. Obvious reasons for not challenging him directly has nothing to do with the topic itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) Yes. I expect Gailey to be just as bad next year. Expecting people to do something different or better than they have done in the past in what leads to dissappointment and failure. When Gailey was hired I liked it and thought he fit the profile of a coach that could lead this team to the Superbowl. He has had his chance. When the opposing teams are repeatedly sitting on the sidelines laughing in the 3rd quarter someone needs to take the fall. Edited December 19, 2012 by bmur66 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Your premise is that Gailey WILL be just as bad next year. I'm saying, thats not necessarily true. Agree to disagree. Obvious reasons for not challenging him directly has nothing to do with the topic itself. i just want you to list one positive influence that gailey will have. I can't come up with one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 For obvious reasons, I will not directly challenge you I think we're having a discussion, not challenging each other. You want continuity. Provide 5 specific reasons for retaining Chan Gailey. I'll provide 5 specific reasons for not retaining him. 1. He is a terrible game manager. Clock management, use of time outs, use of challenges are not sufficient for an NFL head coach. 2. He does not put his players in the best position to succeed. He takes what the defense gives (passing opportunities) rather than do what this team does best (run the ball). He runs empty backfield on 3rd and 3 thereby taking the threat of the run out of the equation. 3. He is unwilling to involve himself in the defense or special teams. 4. He does not inspire the team or fans. 5. He averages 5 wins a season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Here is a list of reasons why continuity makes the most sense. The Bills are completely incapable of hiring anyone better. They shouldn't even try so as to avoid the embarrassment. 15-31 is good enough for a city like Buffalo. The fans should genuflect and be thankful for it. Not even reaching the same winning percentage level as Dick Jauron, the coach fired in-season and that the team Photoshopped out of its official picture, is perfectly acceptable and a clear indication that things are being built the right way. In the 3rd year of your rebuild, fielding potentially the worst defense in Buffalo Bills history is another indication that you're pitching a perfect game and got things going in the right direction. With a defense that has been a freak show and hasn't improved, an offense that has regressed badly, and football follies across the board, it makes perfect sense to assume that more time and time alone will fix all the problems. Poor decision making and lack of direction and leadership from the top on down to the bottom is well-known to correct itself in a highly-competitive environment by taking no action and making no changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tu-Toned Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 You jump out of the station wagon and "tweak" Gailey. We'll sit here and watch. How much tweaking of the systems do you see Gailey and Wannstedt doing? Be honest. How does "tweaking the system" help when the players have quit? How does the same guy walk into the same room and say "Listen up, I'm going to tweak a few things!" and turn into a leader of a group of guys that aren't even interested in trying? Are you expecting more than muffled laughter? Agreed, he has to go, you can't tweak not having a sack, you can't tweak game day mismanagement, you can't tweak having your head up your arse a crtitical times in a game, you can't tweak being emotion and punchless on the sideline, and another thing, wtf is with those granny glasses, doesn't he relaize that they make contacts now that allow you to see up close and far away? I realize that the last one is a bit personal, but I'm just sayin!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 What I'm saying, is there have been plenty of coaches that have had a "track record" of success. Look at Spurrier for example, everyone thought he would be a good NFL coach. What happened? Track record does not always translate into a good coach, and for the most part, new NFL coaches go through a couple of years of turmoil before they are anything, IF they will be anything. Sure, you can point to RECENT coaches, but over the history of the NFL, which people like to so quickly forget, those coaches don't fair quite as well as often as people like to believe. Continuity would actually be a departure of the same old same old at OBD, they have rinced and repeated 3 years and out, and it hasn't worked. Time for a change. I wasn't about this when it was Jauron, but now I feel we need to stay the course. Yes, things can change, and they do, often, in the NFL. Next year we could be talking about 8-5 rather than 5-8 under the same regime. Nobody wants to believe it, everyone wants to point to what has been done recently, but a coach can change concepts yearly and can change the entire complexion of the team by tweaking things here and there. A wholesale change is not needed. I notice you're still ducking my questions. Here they are again, to save you the trouble of going back a page: 1. "Would the 49ers have righted the ship (winning records, playoff appearances, etc.) by keeping one of the coaches they fired from 2003-2012 instead of firing them?" 2. "Would the Bills have made the playoffs by now if Gregg Williams, Mike Mularkey, or Dick Jauron had been retained as head coach?" I'm guessing the answer to #2 is no, based on your comments above? But I'll be honest, I'm having trouble understanding your argument here. You say that blowing things up after 3 years won't lead to winning, and use Spurrier as an example of a guy who was thought to be the savior, but sucked. But Gailey's just as bad. Shouldn't the Redskins have kept Spurrier in the sake of continuity? You say you weren't on board with giving Jauron a 4th year, but you are for Gailey. Why? In hindsight, do you wish we'd kept Jauron longer and given him a 5th year? If not, what has Gailey shown you in the last 3 years that suggests that unlike Jauron, he is a good coach that will turn things around? How is Gailey different from Spurrier or Jauron? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffBill Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Your premise is that Gailey WILL be just as bad next year. I'm saying, thats not necessarily true. Agree to disagree. Obvious reasons for not challenging him directly has nothing to do with the topic itself. Gailey and his teams have gotten worse each year, with more talent each year then the year before, so what makes anyone think things would improve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HamSandwhich Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I'm done talking about this, apparently I get warning points for having my opinion, so I'll stop. You all know where I stand. Continuity is best for us for reasons I've highlighted. We'll leave it at that and agree to disagree. It's been fun debating, and I see where you all are coming from. It's frusterating, I understand. I'm one of the most frustrated people about this team, and my friends would call me nothing if not one of the most fanatical people about a team they have ever met. I stand by my Bills and stand by whatever decision they make. Through this all, the one thread that combines us all is that we're all fans and we only want to see the team succeed, and I can take solice in that, though our opinions may differ. They are just that, opinions. With that said, GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterpan Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 and if nobody buys tickets. the biggest change they will make is the city they play for. then good riddence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts