Bills vow Doug Marrone will make them winners

[Glory Bound]

LMAO

 

Not as if some of us haven't been thru this drill before. The funny thing is that at some point like a stopped clock you too may be right.

 

In the meantime you all seem to know that the continued poor or questionable decisions by the team are just going to happen to work out.

 

I'll gladly make a deal, and despite the fact that I haven't predicted that Marrone will fail, and I'm sure others will join me, but if he does fail, all of you talking like you leave the forum permanently. If they don't, we will.

 

What say ye?

 

Somehow I don't see you taking me up on that.

All I know is I'm with Beerball. I have a new girlfriend...she's got a new hair style...totally different personality...different body type...nice teeth...& a fresh look about her. What my old sea hag did last year is now totally irrelevant. I'm not even gonna think about her, let alone reference her. It simply doesn't matter at this juncture! I'm gonna give my new chick a chance & go in with a positive tude!

[K-9]

The guys who are "right" every year are just betting on black every spin. They can't tell you why we suck. Just that we do. Takes no skill or insight to be a d-bag.

 

PTR

 

Now Promo, let's not dehumanize anyone.

 

I'm about to go all Chuck Lester up in here.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[OCinBuffalo]

All I know is I'm with Beerball. I have a new girlfriend...she's got a new hair style...totally different personality...different body type...nice teeth...& a fresh look about her. What my old sea hag did last year is now totally irrelevant. I'm not even gonna think about her, let alone reference her. It simply doesn't matter at this juncture! I'm gonna give my new chick a chance & go in with a positive tude!

Soo...are you telling us you dated a big girl, with bad hair, and summer teeth, with that not-so-fresh feeling?

 

Um...why?

 

[Dorkington]

 

 

This is idiocy. Well intentioned, an attempt at thoughtful discourse, but still, idiocy.

 

It's idiocy for 1 reason:

31 out of 32 teams will not win the SB, and only 12 teams of out of 32 will make the playoffs. That means 20 don't. Thus, "realisitic" means the negative people will tend to be "right" automatically...

 

...due to math...

 

....and not necessarily due to their ability to analyze, or understand, the game, or the quality of their understanding/analysis.

 

Being negative is simply the easy, and safe, choice. Of course it is the most "realistic". The math means it has to be.

 

But, it certainly doesn't make anyone who tends to be negatve more knowledgeable about football. In fact the person who chooses to be positive, because they have something they've seen that makes them that way, and when the positive outcome they predict occurs?

 

They have a high propensity to know the game better than the negative person does, again, due to the math. To pick against the "baked in" math/trend, and be right, means you almost definitely know WTF you are talking about, or, you just got lucky,

 

Conversely, being right about being negative tells us very little, since again the odds are stacked 2/3 in the negative poster's favor.

 

I'd much rather be a "failing" team that makes the playoffs every once in a while, or at least has a winning record. The Bills are relatively in a league of their own over the last 12 years.

 

But again, speaking for myself, I am fully ready to be "wrong" (though I haven't really predicted anything in this thread, other than not giving much weight to the FO's sound bites). Bring on the wins! Bring on relevancy!

[Meatloaf Sandwich]

 

 

Bullitsh.

 

If Marrone & Co. fail like the others they'll fire some scapegoat, but you can bet it won't be Whaley or Brandon. Brandon shouldn't be there now, he's a joke in the role.

 

 

 

Not sure why I should, I haven't predicted that he won't be successful.

 

Talk about trolls.

 

Bills don't start winning I doubt whoever ends up buying the Bills will keep any of the trash.

[transient]

Great job by Yahoo that shines a light on the lazy work by some of the folks at the Buffalo News.

It's so disappointing how certain members of the News' staff would rather spend time making Mario Williams’ foot a big issue rather than taking the time to do some research and give their readers an interesting piece to read.

Do we really need these clowns asking the same question 7 different ways so they can try to get a reaction out of Marrone on which they can fixate?

Please give us something insightful for a change.

It was a well-researched and well-written piece by Les Carpenter

It's hard to imagine that anyone with a pulse who cares about the Bills would not be excited after having read it.

However some people are downright reptilian.

The interesting thing about this piece is the degree of inside information. Given everything that has happened over the last several weeks, all of the useful information has been from non-local sources, while all of the tabloid pieces have been TBN and the like. Anyone else get the feeling that the locals have bitten the hand that feeds one too many times, and some of their testiness is a reflection of their dwindling access? You could put Marrone's "blowup (hardly)" in the context of one final shot across the bow.

[PromoTheRobot]

I'd much rather be a "failing" team that makes the playoffs every once in a while, or at least has a winning record. The Bills are relatively in a league of their own over the last 12 years.

 

But again, speaking for myself, I am fully ready to be "wrong" (though I haven't really predicted anything in this thread, other than not giving much weight to the FO's sound bites). Bring on the wins! Bring on relevancy!

 

I call BS because I've been around long enough to know that being an okay team that makes the playoffs once in a while is never good enough.

 

You have to understand the goalposts always move. Whatever the Bills achieve is always one short of what we should have done. Make the playoffs? Big deal. We haven't won a playoff game since 1994. Win a playoff game? Big deal. Get to a Super Bowl and we can talk. Get to a Super Bowl. OMG!! We're gonna lose 5! We are the worst team in history!

 

That's what fuels the negative folks. They always want to be the first to say they knew we weren't good enough.

 

PTR

[BillsBytheBay]

You can't have you're cake and eat it too. It's a start to national coverage. Even Kolbs knee injury was a story line on NFL network. Bills news seems a little more relevant this year.

[OCinBuffalo]

I call BS because I've been around long enough to know that being an okay team that makes the playoffs once in a while is never good enough.

 

You have to understand the goalposts always move. Whatever the Bills achieve is always one short of what we should have done. Make the playoffs? Big deal. We haven't won a playoff game since 1994. Win a playoff game? Big deal. Get to a Super Bowl and we can talk. Get to a Super Bowl. OMG!! We're gonna lose 5! We are the worst team in history!

 

That's what fuels the negative folks. They always want to be the first to say they knew we weren't good enough.

 

PTR

Yes, and by doing this, they create a near mathematical certainty( = 97%), that they will always be:

right-->more realistic-->more knowledgeable about football. It's logical fallacy based on poor math skills.

 

I don't know whether it is intentional. However, that really doesn't matter, as the result is always the same = "blah blah I was right about us sucking".

 

Being "objective" '= starting with a 97% chance that you are right, and then taking credit for being right, because you were being "realistic" in your evaluation. No, you simply had the odds, significantly, in your favor. Same thing is true for playoffs = 63%. That's like taking credit for being the house in Vegas. That's not sound, "realistic", analysis: that's taking credit for being exactly in line with a lucrative business model.

 

The people who pick the Bills record are the real objective folks.

 

And, the "every year teams that were 4th in the division end up as 1st...but not the Bills" is a double edged sword. Since that is true, then we can clearly say that the Bills playoff drought is an outlier, and something to abhor. But, we can just as easily say that since it is an abberation, the chances of that abberation being corrected increase every year. The Bills don't live in a vaccuum, and the data based on the entire league shows that we can reasonably expect a correction relatively soon.

 

So, being positive, in terms of expecting that correction, is, if we do our stats properly, because we know how: the most realistic position to take.

[PromoTheRobot]

Yes, and by doing this, they create a near mathematical certainty( = 97%), that they will always be:

right-->more realistic-->more knowledgeable about football. It's logical fallacy based on poor math skills.

 

I don't know whether it is intentional. However, that really doesn't matter, as the result is always the same = "blah blah I was right about us sucking".

 

Being "objective" '= starting with a 97% chance that you are right, and then taking credit for being right, because you were being "realistic" in your evaluation. No, you simply had the odds, significantly, in your favor. Same thing is true for playoffs = 63%. That's like taking credit for being the house in Vegas. That's not sound, "realistic", analysis: that's taking credit for being exactly in line with a lucrative business model.

 

The people who pick the Bills record are the real objective folks.

 

And, the "every year teams that were 4th in the division end up as 1st...but not the Bills" is a double edged sword. Since that is true, then we can clearly say that the Bills playoff drought is an outlier, and something to abhor. But, we can just as easily say that since it is an abberation, the chances of that abberation being corrected increase every year. The Bills don't live in a vaccuum, and the data based on the entire league shows that we can reasonably expect a correction relatively soon.

 

So, being positive, in terms of expecting that correction, is, if we do our stats properly, because we know how: the most realistic position to take.

 

One bit of bad luck for the Bills is playing in one of the best divisions in the NFL in the last decade.

 

PTR

[BillnutinHouston]

Brandon shouldn't be there now, he's a joke in the role.

Can we agree that Brandon and Bob Kraft have similar roles with their respective teams? If so, please explain how Brandon is less qualified than Bob Kraft for the President/CEO role.

[OCinBuffalo]

One bit of bad luck for the Bills is playing in one of the best divisions in the NFL in the last decade.

 

PTR

I've got stuff to do, but, if I get some extra time, I might try and do a proper analysis to see if this is true. I would think that the non-division win % over 10 years would be a good way to measure if that was in fact the case. And, no, the Patriots performance in that would not skew the #s: they are in our division.

 

I might have time to do a thread this week on that. We'll see. Somebody might already have that stuff laying around as well.

Edited August 5, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[BillsVet]

One of the hallmarks of our 21st century society, as demonstrated on this message board (and specifically in this thread), remains a complete intolerance of contrarian opinion. Those fans who aren't excited about the "new" Bills are deemed negative, told to get another team, and roundly criticized for questioning the happy training camp talk we typically see this time of year.

 

We're left with ad hominem attacks precipitated by those who won't deign to understand why people don't think like them. Brandon can say what he wants, but talk is cheap. Didn't someone once say to show us the baby first?

[bills44]

One of the hallmarks of our 21st century society, as demonstrated on this message board (and specifically in this thread), remains a complete intolerance of contrarian opinion.

We're left with ad hominem attacks precipitated by those who won't deign to understand why people don't think like them.

That works both ways.

[OCinBuffalo]

One of the hallmarks of our 21st century society, as demonstrated on this message board (and specifically in this thread), remains a complete intolerance of contrarian opinion. Those fans who aren't excited about the "new" Bills are deemed negative, told to get another team, and roundly criticized for questioning the happy training camp talk we typically see this time of year.

 

We're left with ad hominem attacks precipitated by those who won't deign to understand why people don't think like them. Brandon can say what he wants, but talk is cheap. Didn't someone once say to show us the baby first?

Read my posts in this thread and show me where any part of it is ad hominem, or predicated on anything other than logic and basic statistical method.

 

I have no tolerance for logical fallacy = "negative fans tend to be right". Why should anyone tolerate poor logic/math skills?

 

If you want to talk about the ills of society, we should start with that. The case has been presented to you. If you think you can find fault, by all means, go ahead an try. Good luck!

 

IF there are any problems with society at all, they begin with a lack of critical thinking skills, a willingness to conform to magical thinking, because a celebrity, be they movie star or politician, suggests that not doing so is "evil", and ends with those purporting that the truth, is somehow offensive, and that facts and properly prepared statistics, can somehow be hateful.

[PromoTheRobot]

I've got stuff to do, but, if I get some extra time, I might try and do a proper analysis to see if this is true. I would think that the non-division win % over 10 years would be a good way to measure if that was in fact the case. And, no, the Patriots performance in that would not skew the #s: they are in our division.

 

I might have time to do a thread this week on that. We'll see. Somebody might already have that stuff laying around as well.

 

Be sure to factor in the entire division.

[OCinBuffalo]

Be sure to factor in the entire division.

Yeah, I'm sitting here trying to come up with a method for that. In a sense, you would think that a single team consistently winning the division would suggest a lesser division, in terms of toughness. The question is whether parity suggests more difficulty, or whether it has nothing to do with it.

 

The NFC West, for most of the last 10 years, was the worst division in football. We know that both anecdotally and statistically. How many 7-9 division winners have we had? Has anyone ever won any division with a losing record? They've had a lot of turnover re division winner. Does that indicated toughness, nothing, or suckiness?

 

Inversely, does the Patriots record in the AFC East over the last 10 years mean something, or nothing, about the toughness of the division? If every team in the AFC East has to play the Patriots 2x, instead of one, does that make the division inherently more "tough"?

 

This is about weighting. And I'll have to see....

 

That's why I'm thinking I have to weight the non-division wins vs. non-division wins of all other divisions as a %, over time.

[San-O]

Read my posts in this thread and show me where any part of it is ad hominem, or predicated on anything other than logic and basic statistical method.

 

I have no tolerance for logical fallacy = "negative fans tend to be right". Why should anyone tolerate poor logic/math skills?

 

 

You seem to have no tolerance for anything that you don't agree with. And stop misquoting people. It's ignorant.

 

And there was no logical fallacy , or poor logic/math skills involved, it's history: check the record, get a grip.

 

Oh, and back away from yourself.

 

 

This board has declined over the years, it used to be a fun place. IMO.

[Endless Ike]

It is people like you i wish would find another team.

I also wonder what you would do if/when the Bills win a SB. At what point during the season will you go from negative Nancy to bandwagon Bill??

 

The thing about being a realist is you get to respond to REALITY, and so can go from being a Negative Nancy to a Bandwagon Bill when the team has shown to be more than atrocious. You don't get extra points for hoping really hard that THIS TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT.

 

Being negative is more than justified by everyone's personal experience. Why should anyone be surprised, or try to talk anyone out of it?

Edited August 5, 2013 by Endless Ike

[PromoTheRobot]

Yeah, I'm sitting here trying to come up with a method for that. In a sense, you would think that a single team consistently winning the division would suggest a lesser division, in terms of toughness. The question is whether parity suggests more difficulty, or whether it has nothing to do with it.

 

The NFC West, for most of the last 10 years, was the worst division in football. We know that both anecdotally and statistically. How many 7-9 division winners have we had? Has anyone ever won any division with a losing record? They've had a lot of turnover re division winner. Does that indicated toughness, nothing, or suckiness?

 

Inversely, does the Patriots record in the AFC East over the last 10 years mean something, or nothing, about the toughness of the division? If every team in the AFC East has to play the Patriots 2x, instead of one, does that make the division inherently more "tough"?

 

This is about weighting. And I'll have to see....

 

That's why I'm thinking I have to weight the non-division wins vs. non-division wins of all other divisions as a %, over time.

 

Since 2000 the Bills are 23-56 vs the AFC East, with only 3 wins vs New England. That is a winning % of just .291

 

The Bills record vs everyone else since 2000 is 59-70, or a winning % of .457.

 

So it appears the Bills were still not that great out of the division but they were totally dominated by their division opponents.

 

PTR

Edited August 5, 2013 by PromoTheRobot

[bowery4]

I have been just a tad more negative this time because .... well, the 13 years before. I do value that they are really making it look like they have new goals and a mission, That is very positive. I do like the PR better this year than in the past, as well. I hope still. Even though it would be easier and mathematically logical not too, I guess. All that said they still have to play the games, that will be the real thing. That can sell me or not on the FO and the team in general. Improvement would be enough (at least for this year). And total failure is totally unacceptable. I Imagine that the beginning of the season might be pretty rough, so I will overlook it if it is. The whole season isn't important unless they win 5 or 6 games and then tank.

I am looking for development and improvement; fluff PR pieces are nice to read and help breed hope but QBs that trip on wet mats and get injured at camp......well, it is the Bills and it seems like we always have some crazy **** like that (which does help fuel the pessimism whether I want it to or not)..

 

Show me the baby?

Stop saying that, what are you trying to jinx them?

 

All I know is I'm with Beerball. I have a new girlfriend...she's got a new hair style...totally different personality...different body type...nice teeth...& a fresh look about her. What my old sea hag did last year is now totally irrelevant. I'm not even gonna think about her, let alone reference her. It simply doesn't matter at this juncture! I'm gonna give my new chick a chance & go in with a positive tude!

You realize you are dating a Buffalo? (you may need to have lived here in Thailand to understand why that is really humorous, being called a Buffalo here is a big, big insult!)

[OCinBuffalo]

You seem to have no tolerance for anything that you don't agree with. And stop misquoting people. It's ignorant.

 

And there was no logical fallacy , or poor logic/math skills involved, it's history: check the record, get a grip.

 

Oh, and back away from yourself.

 

 

This board has declined over the years, it used to be a fun place. IMO.

Edit: Actually in reading your post again? I'm thinking: you really don't understand what I'm saying at all, do you? Hence the insecurity.

 

I have no tolerance for 3.5+3.5 = 8. Yes. Guilty as charged. I'm not going to back away from being a rational, thinking, person. As I said above, I'm not going to subsrcibe to magical thinking, just because it makes you feel better.

 

The facts are what they are, and no histrionics and judgements about this board on your part change that.

 

Every year every team has a 2 in 3 chance of not making the playoffs. Thus, historically, but really, INEVITABLY, every fan of every team, who says their team will not make the playoffs, is more likely to be right, by a factor of 50%, than they are to be wrong. That is true BEFORE anybody considers, or has a chance to say anything about any player, coach, team. That is true for every team, and every fan.

 

Thus, it is patently retarded to ignore that reality, and magically think your way into saying "negative fans tend to be right, because they are more realistic, or know more about football". No. Negative fans have Vegas house odds on their side from minute 1. Now, after we take that into account, we can talk about analysis. We cannot however completely ingore it, and pretend that there's a historical "trend" here that is completely unaffected by it. Again, that is magical thinking, and I will not tolerate it.

 

Get a grip on that.

 

The quality of this board is directly proportional to the amount of intolerance we have for usubstantiated nonsense, and those who refuse to accept correction, when they've been accurately corrected.

Edited August 5, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[BillsWatch]

Great job by Yahoo that shines a light on the lazy work by some of the folks at the Buffalo News.

 

They are not lazy. They are uninspired 4th rate journalists on a 3rd rate paper.

[OCinBuffalo]

The thing about being a realist is you get to respond to REALITY, and so can go from being a Negative Nancy to a Bandwagon Bill when the team has shown to be more than atrocious. You don't get extra points for hoping really hard that THIS TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT.

 

Being negative is more than justified by everyone's personal experience. Why should anyone be surprised, or try to talk anyone out of it?

Personal experience may justify it. But, the math and the logic do not.

 

Emoting is not thinking. And, opinion based solely on emoting? Nobody is entitled to that. Not if they want the rest of us to take them seriously.

Edited August 5, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[hondo in seattle]

If Marrone turns out to be as good a NFL head coach as I think he will.... If Pettine is as good out of Rex's shadow as I think he can be... If EJ turns out to be the kind of QB I think he can be... If the new WRs step up and live up to their perceived potential... If the Bills stay healthy... This will be a really fun season to watch!

 

How many IFs is that?

 

I understand the optimism because I feel it too - the most I've had since Levey and Kelly teamed up. But I get the Negative Nancies, too.

[vincec]

I call BS because I've been around long enough to know that being an okay team that makes the playoffs once in a while is never good enough.

 

You have to understand the goalposts always move. Whatever the Bills achieve is always one short of what we should have done. Make the playoffs? Big deal. We haven't won a playoff game since 1994. Win a playoff game? Big deal. Get to a Super Bowl and we can talk. Get to a Super Bowl. OMG!! We're gonna lose 5! We are the worst team in history!

 

That's what fuels the negative folks. They always want to be the first to say they knew we weren't good enough.

 

PTR

There is only one champion every season. Everyone else has failed. That's the bottom line in the NFL. Anyone who is ok just winning and making the playoffs once in a while is basically a loser. The reason I think it stinks that the Bills haven't even made the playoffs in forever is that they are SO far away from being a champion that it's almost unimaginable at this point.

[Dorkington]

 

 

I call BS because I've been around long enough to know that being an okay team that makes the playoffs once in a while is never good enough.

 

You have to understand the goalposts always move. Whatever the Bills achieve is always one short of what we should have done. Make the playoffs? Big deal. We haven't won a playoff game since 1994. Win a playoff game? Big deal. Get to a Super Bowl and we can talk. Get to a Super Bowl. OMG!! We're gonna lose 5! We are the worst team in history!

 

That's what fuels the negative folks. They always want to be the first to say they knew we weren't good enough.

 

PTR

 

My expectations are relative to my team, it's culture and its recent history. For a while, as a Lakers fan, it was championship or bust. Right now, with their issues, I'll be excited if they make the playoffs and do well in the first round. As a Dodgers fan, I'll be excited if they win their division and win a playoff series, as they haven't done that in a while. That's even considering that they have a pay roll that should get them to the World Series (if that's how things actually worked).

 

For the Bills? I'll be happy/excited with above .500, and a playoff chase.

 

In general, as I've experienced a wide range of success across my teams, I prefer the excitement of having a team in the playoffs, even if they don't make it all the way.

 

So you can call BS, but I know what I like.

[Keukasmallies]

Is it really negative, given the past decade of debacles at OBD, to adopt a wait-and-see attitude?

[JohnC]

Since 2000 the Bills are 23-56 vs the AFC East, with only 3 wins vs New England. That is a winning % of just .291

 

The Bills record vs everyone else since 2000 is 59-70, or a winning % of .457.

 

So it appears the Bills were still not that great out of the division but they were totally dominated by their division opponents.

 

PTR

 

Do you have the stats for the Bills record against winning teams over that same period? I suspect that it is less than 33%.

 

There is a large segment of posters who demand optimism from others pror to the season at the risk of being harshly vilified. That in itself makes little sense. In essence those who have been overwhelmingly more right in their prognostications for almost a full generation are being coerced to toe the crooked line of the same toads who have been consistently overwhelmingly wrong over the same generation. Think about that.

Edited August 5, 2013 by JohnC

[machine gun kelly]

I do this far too often, but I'd rather have hope than act like a crumujin. There are reasons to be hopeful this year that they will improve. The coaching seems better, the personnel moves seem better (no they can't keep everyone before the Levitre comments), and the accolades from people I respect like Bill Parcells, Bill Polian, and Sean Payton about the Marrone hire is inspiring.

 

Well for those other positive folks put there including me, then we get to be excited for a few weeks. If we have improved than we continue to feel better about our team. If they are not that good then we come back to earth and feel like the other negative people on this post. It's a choice. I'd rather have hope than get to be the I told you so guy.

 

My guess is we go 9-7, miss the playoffs again, but Manuel starts to show by the end of the year that we have a franchise QB. We split the Pats, sweep the Jets, and split the Fins. We win a couple of games against tough winning teams, and when we lose, we lose more times than not by less than 7. That's improvement over the past and then make a serious run over then next three years. The real key with our youth is can Whaley shore up our talented guys early so they do not look for inflated salaries. I can really see us dumping Mario if he does not have a great year.

 

Hopefully I'm aiming to shoot the dog and they go 11-5, and win the division. That would be fun. We'll see.

[vincec]

Is it really negative, given the past decade of debacles at OBD, to adopt a wait-and-see attitude?

That is an outrage! Go be a fan of someone else if you aren't a koolaid drinker! You must lead a miserable life! etc.

[OCinBuffalo]

Is it really negative, given the past decade of debacles at OBD, to adopt a wait-and-see attitude?

No. Not in the slightest.

 

It is however, silly to adopt a "I said the Bills wouldn't make the playoffs, and I was right, so that makes me more realistic and knowledgeable about football than anybody who said they would make the playoffs" attitude.

 

All that actually makes you is: too dim to know that you are merely benefiting from good odds. The best is treating a statistical inevitability, as a trend, because it happens every year, and is therefore: historical. Yes, and the sun rising today, in the morning, and not at night? Called it! All hail the Knowledge!

 

For their next trick, they will demonstrate their insightful correlation between the presence of water, and wetness. Hey it happens every time, so, it's historic!

 

Actually, I don't know how anybody, but perhaps a very few who've been to lots of camps, could be anywhere but at "wait and see" at this point.

[Dorkington]

Can you point me to examples of this?

 

It is however, silly to adopt a "I said the Bills wouldn't make the playoffs, and I was right, so that makes me more realistic and knowledgeable about football than anybody who said they would make the playoffs" attitude.

 

I don't really see anyone here doing that. In stead I see "whatever FO guy, show us on the field, enough nonsense talk".

[8-8 Forever?]

I can't disagree with you, but I believe the winds of change have finally blown in. Should we bash Brandon for believing that too?

Yes. I like all the new faces across the board. These Bills are completely unpredictable this year. Which will make it fun to watch and see what happens. It would be tragic to see a pile of IR injuries ruin it, but assuming that does not happen, this season will be fresh if nothing else.

[Ronin]

Can you rewrite this into a coherent paragraph?

 

I thought it was pretty clear.

[Ronin]

All I know is I'm with Beerball. I have a new girlfriend...she's got a new hair style...totally different personality...different body type...nice teeth...& a fresh look about her. What my old sea hag did last year is now totally irrelevant. I'm not even gonna think about her, let alone reference her. It simply doesn't matter at this juncture! I'm gonna give my new chick a chance & go in with a positive tude!

 

A "postive tude" is one thing, trolling and criticizing anyone and everything that points out the realities is quite another, wouldn't you say?

 

You rainbows and lolliopops people won't even allow anyone else to express any other non R&L opinions. Well pardon us if we want to actually see some evidence first, besides one bottom 10 O/D beating up its counterpart while declaring how good they're all going to be, again, before we start coming to conclusions that you and others have already prematurely decreed as facts!

 

Think you and everyone else can do that? ... Apparently not.

 

Meanwhile, in case you missed it, those of us with more realistic outlooks have seen the kind of song and dance that you're engaged in w/ the following people:

 

GMs

 

Donahoe (Particularly, remember how he was the one that "built the Steelers"?, now it's Whaley apparently)

Levy

Nix

 

Head Coaches

 

Williams

Mularkey

Jauron (again, particularly)

Gailey (also w/ everyone ranting about his "open style" of offense blah, blah, blah)

 

Have we not learned?

 

I also think that it's quite telling when people seem to think that "turning around a program/team" means making it barely better than a .500 team in a weak conference while making something out of the newest bowl game in a system whereby 70 of 124 teams, 56%, which is more than the percentage of NBA or NHL teams make the playoffs, make some kind of bowl game whereby half of them or more are completely irrelevant except for the money.

 

In essence, apparently those same people should be really excited if Marrone gets into the playoffs at 9-7 and loses in the Wild Card round every year.

 

Again, unlike you, I'm not making any predictions as far as Marrone goes. But it's folly to ignore the odds of him doing all of the rainbows and lolllipops things that you and others insist that he's going to do w/o any evidence whatsoever that he's even capable at this level while completely ignoring the red flags involved.

 

Meanwhile, to even approach discussion of those things in an objective and logical manner gets labeled as trolling here.

 

As usual, what's needed is two forums, one for the intelligent and realistic, and one for the real trolls that dominate opinion here and disallow any other.

 

... and no, I don't expect this post to sink in, I expect you and all the other slap-happy overly euphoric fans to completely ignore it, have an emotional response to it, and then go bi-polar if/when it becomes evident that Marrone ain't cuttin' it as if you were down on the decision to hire him to begin with.

 

Deja vu!

 

Bills don't start winning I doubt whoever ends up buying the Bills will keep any of the trash.

 

I doubt it as well. Any new owner is going to likely get rid of the entire staff and FO, or most of them. I mean who in their right mind would keep Brandon? The only reason he's even in the role is because of his geographical upbringing and the fact that he can sell ice to all of the eskimoes here in the forum.

 

The roster will stay the same tho obviously, plus/minus cuts etc.

 

Is it really negative, given the past decade of debacles at OBD, to adopt a wait-and-see attitude?

 

Yup, here it sure is. In fact you're a "troll" if you do.

 

LOL

 

Like I said, they need a separate forum for the realistic and those that aren't driven in life by their emotions instead of their brains.

 

Do you have the stats for the Bills record against winning teams over that same period? I suspect that it is less than 33%.

 

There is a large segment of posters who demand optimism from others pror to the season at the risk of being harshly vilified. That in itself makes little sense. In essence those who have been overwhelmingly more right in their prognostications for almost a full generation are being coerced to toe the crooked line of the same toads who have been consistently overwhelmingly wrong over the same generation. Think about that.

 

33%? Sheeeet!

 

I'l bet it's less than half of that. I'll run the numbers and get back to us ...

 

Personal experience may justify it. But, the math and the logic do not.

 

Emoting is not thinking. And, opinion based solely on emoting? Nobody is entitled to that. Not if they want the rest of us to take them seriously.

 

AMEN brother!!!

 

If Marrone turns out to be as good a NFL head coach as I think he will.... If Pettine is as good out of Rex's shadow as I think he can be... If EJ turns out to be the kind of QB I think he can be... If the new WRs step up and live up to their perceived potential... If the Bills stay healthy... This will be a really fun season to watch!

 

How many IFs is that?

 

I understand the optimism because I feel it too - the most I've had since Levey and Kelly teamed up. But I get the Negative Nancies, too.

 

Especially since the only WR that's proven to be worth a **** is already injured.

Edited August 5, 2013 by TaskersGhost

[OCinBuffalo]

Since 2000 the Bills are 23-56 vs the AFC East, with only 3 wins vs New England. That is a winning % of just .291

 

The Bills record vs everyone else since 2000 is 59-70, or a winning % of .457.

 

So it appears the Bills were still not that great out of the division but they were totally dominated by their division opponents.

 

PTR

Lazy man's way out: Steal somebody else's work!

 

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-05-13/nfc-east-leagues-toughest-division-last-five-seasons-by-far

 

The AFC East is third overall. However, I have my criticisms:

 

It's only 5 seasons, not including last year. It's dopey to skew the results with playoff and SB outcomes, whose effects cannot possibly be distributed evenly over the entire range, and therefore introduce all sorts of bias. Consider: does the AFC north have more playoff appearances because they are good, or, because the AFC West is deficient? Same question, just change the names, for the NFC. Does the AFC West being awful, make the AFC North tougher? Of course it doesn't. Does the Giants winning the SB 2 times mean that that Eagles are better? Of couse not. The Giants playoff performance has nothing to do with the Eagles.

 

This is introducing a confirmation bias, that says: teams that made the playoffs or won the SB are "good". Thank you, Butthead = "We like stuff that's cool, but, we hate stuff that sucks". It tells us nothing about why "stuff" is "cool" or "sucks" and any assertions made merely confirm the "good/suck". They tell us nothing about why, and muddy the real relationships in the data = non-division record and point differential of division vs division.

 

Point differential? Now, that tells us about why. AFC East is 2nd.

 

The regular season is the only thing that matters here. See, this is why I was saying: I have to think about this a little.

 

But, even with these skewed results, and using the ballpark averages, it's pretty easy to see where this is going regardless:

The Bills have been in one of the toughest divisions, for a long time.

 

Can you point me to examples of this?

 

It is however, silly to adopt a "I said the Bills wouldn't make the playoffs, and I was right, so that makes me more realistic and knowledgeable about football than anybody who said they would make the playoffs" attitude.

 

I don't really see anyone here doing that. In stead I see "whatever FO guy, show us on the field, enough nonsense talk".

I refuse. Go back and read the thread, and, specifically look at what I replied to. It will take you 30 seconds.

[Ronin]

I do this far too often, but I'd rather have hope than act like a crumujin. There are reasons to be hopeful this year that they will improve. The coaching seems better, the personnel moves seem better (no they can't keep everyone before the Levitre comments), and the accolades from people I respect like Bill Parcells, Bill Polian, and Sean Payton about the Marrone hire is inspiring.

 

Well for those other positive folks put there including me, then we get to be excited for a few weeks. If we have improved than we continue to feel better about our team. If they are not that good then we come back to earth and feel like the other negative people on this post. It's a choice. I'd rather have hope than get to be the I told you so guy.

 

My guess is we go 9-7, miss the playoffs again, but Manuel starts to show by the end of the year that we have a franchise QB. We split the Pats, sweep the Jets, and split the Fins. We win a couple of games against tough winning teams, and when we lose, we lose more times than not by less than 7. That's improvement over the past and then make a serious run over then next three years. The real key with our youth is can Whaley shore up our talented guys early so they do not look for inflated salaries. I can really see us dumping Mario if he does not have a great year.

 

Hopefully I'm aiming to shoot the dog and they go 11-5, and win the division. That would be fun. We'll see.

 

This is a great post mkg! It outlines much as you've said a mouthful here and synopsized much. I've highlighted the relevant parts in red.

 

To your points in order:

 

What's a crumujin? Did you mean a curmudgeon? As they say, your command of language tells other people about your intelligence level and other polemical attributes.

 

"Seem", "seems," ... to whom? You? Because it doesn't necessarily seem like that to everyone by far.

 

What do you expect other NFL people to say about one of their own? Here's a little exercise for you, go find the quotes of those same people or others like them saying that a similar hire was a poor one. This falls into the same category as Bill Walsh saying how Trent Edwards was the real deal and would be a great QB. How'd that work out? I can tell you that people here were foolishly even higher on Edwards as direct result of that quote than they are on Marrone now.

 

File that one under who cares and irrelevant.

 

If they're not good, if Marrone is not good, you and the others will be the ones talking about nuking OBD, not those that are more level headed. Once driven by emotion always driven by emotion. Wouldn't it be better to be more level headed as a fan, and insist from the team some competence in their decision making and then voting w/ your feet and wallet when they don't? It's the legion of fans exacxtly like you that give the team what it wants so that they don't have to be competent. So why should they care? Seriously, if everyone comes a running and jumping w/ every change, why should they actually care if they manage and run the team competently since they have what they want? Have you ever stepped back from your beer muscled viewpoint and thought about that for a moment?

 

Have all the hope you want, none of us are trying to deny that, but forums should be for the open discussion of ideas. You and your types only want emotionaly hype and gibberish in here while disallowing any and all other discussion while labeling those that bring it as trolls.

 

Please, someone create the Curmudgeon sub-forum here for those of us that don't see the team going 9-7 this year and winning the Super Bowl next.

 

I think you're less than 1% of people that think that the team will not post a losing season this year much less a winning one at 9-7. Yet, you've personally decreed that any discussion to the contrary is taboo. Nice.

 

A lot of things would be fun mgk. It would be fun to fly around the stadium on game days without an airplane or some kind of engine as the song goes, but file under ain't gonna happen.

 

Meanwhile, to stick your fingers in your ears and put blinders on your eyes about any and all contraindications to anything you say is what, you consider to be intelligent?

[papazoid]

WHICH TEAM WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE ?

 

over the course of a Ten Year Period:

 

Team "A" - makes the playoffs 9 of 10 years but does NOT win Super Bowl.

 

Team "B" - misses the playoffs 9 of 10 years but WINS the Super Bowl once.

[Beerball]

I'd much rather be a "failing" team that makes the playoffs every once in a while, or at least has a winning record. The Bills are relatively in a league of their own over the last 12 years.

 

But again, speaking for myself, I am fully ready to be "wrong" (though I haven't really predicted anything in this thread, other than not giving much weight to the FO's sound bites). Bring on the wins! Bring on relevancy!

The Bills are finally doing what top notch organizations do, & not just sports organizations. They now have a mission statement. They stuck to it through the hiring process. They appear to have drafted well. I like the staff they have put together. If you (the collective you) cannot see the change and take some encouragement from it then I'm surprised. What does any of this guarantee? Not a gosh darn thing. But...the process to get where they are today vs. one year ago is sound. That encourages me.