LOVEMESOMEBILLS Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Good players often become great coaches, because they were overachievers and really knew the game. Great players often become crappy coaches, because they cannot get the players to do what they did or understand the game like they did. There are exceptions of course, like Bill Russell. But great players, Bart Starr, Magic, Kareem (who never made it to head coach), etc, often make lousy coaches. Bird did pretty well (although not in the playoffs) but he used to say it was extremely frustrating. I was saying it because he essentially ran the offense, called all the plays and knew the K-GUN inside and out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 If the biopsy comes back clean the Bills should hire Jim as a QB consultant to teach EJ the K-GUN. I Hackett wants to run it, why not go to the man who ran it. To me this would make sense. Jim could help EJ in other areas also. should hire ? this is the secret of the chinese watch. yes . all will be answered soon enough . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 If the biopsy comes back clean the Bills should hire Jim as a QB consultant to teach EJ the K-GUN. I Hackett wants to run it, why not go to the man who ran it. To me this would make sense. Jim could help EJ in other areas also. It could be a 2-3 day a week gig. I think he could help with the K-GUN and reading defenses not all the other QB stuff. NO NO NO NO NO. Guys don't leave "the game" for nearly 20 years and come back and become relevant. PTR and other get ripped for being "homers" but generally use a bit of logic and information. This is fandom for the sake of fandom. Talk about homer. If he had the itch or was so useful he should have thrown his hat in the ring, I don't know, a decade ago. Not to mention he was never the field general that Peyton or Tom are, so from an intellectual comparison I am not sure it is comparable. Somebody call Frank Reich, he has worked with some hallmark QBs. Put up a statue and call it a day on JK12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 With all due to respect to Kelly, who cares? He is a fan now. I agree with what he said but he has no idea if Manuel is going to make it or not. Wasn't Kelly pushing for Tebow? Because a HOF player at a specific position has the same level of knowledge as a fan in regards to knowing if the player playing that position has it or not? Surely you must be joking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Good players often become great coaches, because they were overachievers and really knew the game. Great players often become crappy coaches, because they cannot get the players to do what they did or understand the game like they did. There are exceptions of course, like Bill Russell. But great players, Bart Starr, Magic, Kareem (who never made it to head coach), etc, often make lousy coaches. Bird did pretty well (although not in the playoffs) but he used to say it was extremely frustrating. Instead of "good vs. great," I would say that stars who aren't perfect physical specimens are better coaches than guys who are just freaks of nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Phil Jackson. Was one of the Harbaugh's good? Is Ron Rivera good? Phil Jackson averaged 6 points per game. Harbaugh was solid but hardly good. Rivera was a solid member on a great defense. None of this guys were close to Kelly as a player. So the point stands. Because a HOF player at a specific position has the same level of knowledge as a fan in regards to knowing if the player playing that position has it or not? Surely you must be joking? No at all. You really think guys like Michael Irvin and Warren Sapp are experts? They are talking heads who are guessing like most fans. How ex great players are big time executives or coaches? I can only think of Elway and Newsime currently. Also, qb is the hardest position in sports to project. Again, Kelly wanted to get Tebow here. Great player but that doesn't make him a great talent evaluator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOVEMESOMEBILLS Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 NO NO NO NO NO. Guys don't leave "the game" for nearly 20 years and come back and become relevant. PTR and other get ripped for being "homers" but generally use a bit of logic and information. This is fandom for the sake of fandom. Talk about homer. If he had the itch or was so useful he should have thrown his hat in the ring, I don't know, a decade ago. Not to mention he was never the field general that Peyton or Tom are, so from an intellectual comparison I am not sure it is comparable. Somebody call Frank Reich, he has worked with some hallmark QBs. Put up a statue and call it a day on JK12. If Hackett has at least in part installed the same k-gun offense that Kelly ran, like I've heard mentioned several times, why not go to the guy who ran it best? I don't know why that's being a homer. How is there no logic in it? Did the same k-gun offense that Kelly ran changed? Why did Hackett say he was using, at least in part, the same offense. But you and your over the top comments stay classy. And by the way he was also calling his own plays so he must have been a pretty good field general. 4 straight Super Bowls, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stony Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I think Jason Kidd and Magic Johnson might disagree. I can't believe Kidd leveraged that half-azz coaching debut of a season into a position w/ the Bucks where he'll have autonomy over roster decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanInUticaTampa Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 it isn't hard to not be happy with the QB play by any of them right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stony Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 If Hackett has at least in part installed the same k-gun offense that Kelly ran, like I've heard mentioned several times, why not go to the guy who ran it best? I don't know why that's being a homer. How is there no logic in it? Did the same k-gun offense that Kelly ran changed? Why did Hackett say he was using, at least in part, the same offense. But you and your over the top comments stay classy. And by the way he was also calling his own plays so he must have been a pretty good field general. 4 straight Super Bowls, no? Big difference between running the huddle and coaching a QB who "sees" things differently than you do. It would be a disaster of a hire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I can't believe Kidd leveraged that half-azz coaching debut of a season into a position w/ the Bucks where he'll have autonomy over roster decisions. I don't know Jason Kidd, but I'd imagine he would score right about the same as Vince Young did on a wunderlic. Bucks are idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bufcomments Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Maybe some of you would disagree but I would be in favor of hiring Kelly as an part-time QB coach. Why not?, he has been running his football camp before he even retired and it would be a great PR move and if he needed time some time of to take care of his cancer situation, no problem. If you gonna run the no-huddle why not take some pointers from an Hall of Famer who ran it the best ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOVEMESOMEBILLS Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Maybe some of you would disagree but I would be in favor of hiring Kelly as an part-time QB coach. Why not?, he has been running his football camp before he even retired and it would be a great PR move and if he needed time some time of to take care of his cancer situation, no problem. If you gonna run the no-huddle why not take some pointers from an Hall of Famer who ran it the best ?? That's all I was trying to say. I'm not talking a full QB coach just in the area of the k-gun ideology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 If Hackett has at least in part installed the same k-gun offense that Kelly ran, like I've heard mentioned several times, why not go to the guy who ran it best? I don't know why that's being a homer. How is there no logic in it? Did the same k-gun offense that Kelly ran changed? Why did Hackett say he was using, at least in part, the same offense. But you and your over the top comments stay classy. And by the way he was also calling his own plays so he must have been a pretty good field general. 4 straight Super Bowls, no? I think you are missing the overall point, if we need an outside consultant to explain our offensive system, there is an issue with either the system we are using or the person installing it. Second, running an offense on the field effectively is much different than teaching it. Thirdly, I make no qualms about it, I do not like Kelly meddling with the team. Thanks be a fan, mascot, ambassador, whatever, but please stay out of the locker room and the front office. Fourth, and most appropriate for my original post, hiring a guy, who 18 years out of the NFL, to explain a system that has been evolving intricately without his input for that same amount of time. It is basically hiring an old guy to explain an old system, which is only being discussed because said system was in its INFANCY 20 years ago with him, is inherently homer-ish. The NFL is intricate and complex, and those intricacies and complexities multiply year in and year out. The game is drastically different, played by different athletes, with different schemes than when Jim was behind center. Jim hasn't progressed with that, by his own choice in not entering the coaching world. He is outdated, and only being considered because he wore a Bills uniform. If that form of logic is seen as over the top, so be it. It seems logical to me. If we are intent on running the K-GUN, how about we stop, because we are well passed the 90's. Note: The Bills Defense bailed Kelly and Co. out of numerous 3 and outs while the offense continued to stutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOVEMESOMEBILLS Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I think you are missing the overall point, if we need an outside consultant to explain our offensive system, there is an issue with either the system we are using or the person installing it. Second, running an offense on the field effectively is much different than teaching it. Thirdly, I make no qualms about it, I do not like Kelly meddling with the team. Thanks be a fan, mascot, ambassador, whatever, but please stay out of the locker room and the front office. Fourth, and most appropriate for my original post, hiring a guy, who 18 years out of the NFL, to explain a system that has been evolving intricately without his input for that same amount of time. It is basically hiring an old guy to explain an old system, which is only being discussed because said system was in its INFANCY 20 years ago with him, is inherently homer-ish. The NFL is intricate and complex, and those intricacies and complexities multiply year in and year out. The game is drastically different, played by different athletes, with different schemes than when Jim was behind center. Jim hasn't progressed with that, by his own choice in not entering the coaching world. He is outdated, and only being considered because he wore a Bills uniform. If that form of logic is seen as over the top, so be it. It seems logical to me. If we are intent on running the K-GUN, how about we stop, because we are well passed the 90's. Note: The Bills Defense bailed Kelly and Co. out of numerous 3 and outs while the offense continued to stutter. You mean the offense that between 1989-1994 that finished in the top ten, and in all but one year finished top 6. Including #1 twice. Man at that pace they must have had like a 100 possessions per game. Weren't they part of the only game without a punt and over 1000 yards combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Jim was pointing out the obvious. EJ has not made any discernible on field improvement. I want him to succeed but the gnawing in my gut says he is not the answer. Hope I am wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 You mean the offense that between 1989-1994 that finished in the top ten, and in all but one year finished top 6. Including #1 twice. Man at that pace they must have had like a 100 possessions per game. Weren't they part of the only game without a punt and over 1000 yards combined. This is getting silly, it is banter for the sake of banter, and I will end it after this. Nobody is discrediting what Jim and the offense did in the 90's. They took what Boomer and Co. started in Cinci, and did it better, then nearly perfected it during it's era. But come on man, that team was balanced, and you can't say that that D wasn't put in really really tough positions a lot. It is not a discredit on Kelly. During the same time frame you listed, the Bills are of course near or at the top in a lot of the yardage, scoring, yardage, and conversion statistics. They are also near or at the top of plays from scrimmage. Conversely, they are near or at the bottom each and every year of time of possession. That isn't to say that the offense was poor, but if you link a few 3 and outs together it compromises your defense, or at the very least puts them in a tough position. The defense was regularly near the top (bottom/worse) for plays per game, right around top 10 for yards per play, and near the best in the league at 3rd down conversions. This stat is significant, because without it, the offense never gets the extra possessions. In that style offense, you need more possessions to stay in the game. The point is the D did in fact make the offense stronger. The point was never to attack Jimbo or call the O overrated, the point is, that never works without both sides of the ball being strong, or else the problems with the K-Gun are magnified. I am not bashing Kelly's play, or the glory days, and frankly don't really deserve to be attacked with buzzwords like Superbowls and generic statistics. The offense was great, I get that, nobody (I am not) is arguing that, but it never would have been what it was if it wasn't backed up by that D, arguing against that is a little flawed. In fact it is, even in today's NFL, the largest criticism of that style of offense. The defense can be put in less than optimal situations, they tire out, and stop making, well stops. If that were to have happened the Bills would have been screwed. That is why Peyton is the man, and listed in the conversation for greatest of all time, for knowing exactly how to use its tempo without a strong defense. Sure call me names and attack my posts, that is fine, but I think all of this is pretty grounded and for that matter a realistic approach to the way that team played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I'm shocked this hasn't been posted yet. If it has somewhere I didn't see, my bad. I fully am on the same page as him that EJ is a great guy with great leadership. He just has not shown he has the skills on the field. http://espn.go.com/n...ls-quarterbacks who isn't displeased. I'm surprised Jimbo is calling EJ and his displeasure with EJ out and not mentioning the play of the OL. Maybe Jimmy forgot that it's the big boys in front of the QB who are the real reason for a QB's success. yes, its the line's fault that he is inaccurate and Trentative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Maybe some of us who have been critical of EJ aren't as dumb as some of the self-proclaimed "smart" fans. He either shines this season or he is gone. Hopefully, he shines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I was saying it because he essentially ran the offense, called all the plays and knew the K-GUN inside and out. with Ted Marchibroda and Frank Reich as his coaches. Kent Hull helped Kelly also with play calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts