Flip Johnson Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 (edited) Since "continuity" seems to be the operative word heading into 2016, I looked at Bills' coaches since Marv to see if there is evidence to support this idea of stability. I am looking at W-L record in year 2 for the last 8 Bills head coaches, as compared to year 1. - Levy +3 in year 2 (4-12 to 7-8. If you count '87 as his first year, then he is +5 in year 2). - Wade Phillips +1 in year 2 (10-6 to 11-5) - Gregg Williams +5 in year 2 (3-13 to 8-8) - Mike Mularkey -4 in year 2 (9-7 to 5-11) - Dick Jauron - Even in year 2 (typical DJ - 7-9 both years) - Chan Gailey +2 in year 2 (4-12 to 6-10) - Doug Marrone +3 in year 2 (6-10 to 9-7) - Rex Ryan - ??? In summary five out 7 coaches previous to Rex made advances, one stayed even, and one got worse. I don't believe that any of our coaches from Gregg Williams through Marrone would be considered league average or above, and yet the results in year 2 of their program generally showed progress. Obviously, there are multiple factors in play - some of these coaches set such a low bar in year 1 that it was relatively easy to get better. Also, Rex is not inheriting an overhauled roster the way Gailey or Williams did. But there is evidence to suggest that W/L should improve in the second year of the HC regime. Edited January 14, 2016 by Flip Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 (edited) IMO a real example of continuity is the Carolina Panthers under Riverboat Ron where things didn't start out so well and they stuck with him through the difficulties. Edited January 14, 2016 by 26CornerBlitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 It'd be interesting to see league wide numbers for the last 10 years or so, vs just the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boater Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 (edited) My prime example: New England. 15 years for Belichick. Yeah, the blind squirrel got a Tom Brady nut. But still, an impressive record. Update/edit: Now I've gone off thinking about this (never a good thing). Does continuity breed success? Or does success breed continuity? te he .. he said breed. Edited January 14, 2016 by boater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Johnson Posted January 14, 2016 Author Share Posted January 14, 2016 My prime example: New England. 15 years for Belichick. Yeah, the blind squirrel got a Tom Brady nut. But still, an impressive record. Update/edit: Now I've gone off thinking about this (never a good thing). Does continuity breed success? Or does success breed continuity? te he .. he said breed. Classic chicken vs. egg scenario. A lot of the coaches I mentioned actually peaked in year 2 and then couldn't sustain what little they had built up. With Rex, if he can build, the team will finally make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boater Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Classic chicken vs. egg scenario. A lot of the coaches I mentioned actually peaked in year 2 and then couldn't sustain what little they had built up. With Rex, if he can build, the team will finally make the playoffs. Agree. Your analysis was good tease. But the Bills were the sample population. It would be cooler expanded to all NFL teams. But I'm not that motivated. We need some dude or dudette grad student to statistically study this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 You can "analyze" this all you want but there are inherent problems in the data and methodology. Continuity is not just about who is coaching the team. I think the matter is best summarized as: 1. Continuity for continuity's sake does not guarantee success. 2. A lack of continuity pretty much guarantees a lack of success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boater Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 You can "analyze" this all you want but there are inherent problems in the data and methodology. Continuity is not just about who is coaching the team. I think the matter is best summarized as: 1. Continuity for continuity's sake does not guarantee success. 2. A lack of continuity pretty much guarantees a lack of success. Good point on No. 1. Example ... continuity with Kaye Stephenson/Hank Bullough/Mularkey would have led to perennial losers. Grass hopper... as an owner, how to distinguish the diff between Stephenson/Bullough/Mullarkey and Belichick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Since "continuity" seems to be the operative word heading into 2016, I looked at Bills' coaches since Marv to see if there is evidence to support this idea of stability. I am looking at W-L record in year 2 for the last 8 Bills head coaches, as compared to year 1. - Levy +3 in year 2 (4-12 to 7-8. If you count '87 as his first year, then he is +5 in year 2). - Wade Phillips +1 in year 2 (10-6 to 11-5) - Gregg Williams +5 in year 2 (3-13 to 8-8) - Mike Mularkey -4 in year 2 (9-7 to 5-11) - Dick Jauron - Even in year 2 (typical DJ - 7-9 both years) - Chan Gailey +2 in year 2 (4-12 to 6-10) - Doug Marrone +3 in year 2 (6-10 to 9-7) - Rex Ryan - ??? In summary five out 7 coaches previous to Rex made advances, one stayed even, and one got worse. I don't believe that any of our coaches from Gregg Williams through Marrone would be considered league average or above, and yet the results in year 2 of their program generally showed progress. Obviously, there are multiple factors in play - some of these coaches set such a low bar in year 1 that it was relatively easy to get better. Also, Rex is not inheriting an overhauled roster the way Gailey or Williams did. But there is evidence to suggest that W/L should improve in the second year of the HC regime. Small sample but nice research. Continuity really matters when you have the right front office and right coaching staff. And that's the challenge. When the wins aren't coming yet, how do you know? The Lions, to give one egregious example, left Matt Millen in charge for 7 years in the name of continuity. They could have given him 20, it would have never gotten better. But I'm all in favor of giving DW and Rex a chance to build something, despite how inauspicious Rex's first season was. One season doesn't define a coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 (edited) It'd be interesting to see league wide numbers for the last 10 years or so, vs just the Bills. Actually, just look at the 24 NFL playoff teams over the last two years… 22 of the teams had returning head coaches 2 of the teams had a new head coach With more distance from the end of the 2015 season, I think that having all brand new head coach/coaches, new systems and with Taylor never being an NFL starter before, the expectations might have just been too darn optimistic to the reality of a team dealing with so many changes. In a word, I think that the whole team in general lacked that basic “trust” factor that you need for success and playoffs. The defensive players didn’t trust Rex’s system, the offensive coaches didn’t trust Taylor to throw the ball a lot for TDs and points, Taylor didn’t trust his receivers (mainly Watkins) enough to win battles. That last game agains the Jets at least gave a glimpse of a team that was starting to learn who they are. That win might have a bigger effect than people want to believe. So here’s hoping that the 2015 season was the prologue to this years 2016 team which will be the team that will play the way we all thought they were going to play in 2015. Edited January 15, 2016 by 1billsfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts