John Warrow’s High Praise For Beane & McDermott Regime

[GG]

11 hours ago, K-9 said:

You owe JW an apology and if I had the power to do so, I’d ban your ineffectual ass until you do so. 

 

 

 

Or at least move the thread to PPP for the full discussion to unfold

[K-9]

10 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

K-9, you think that he owes JW an apology and that this poster should be banned.

 

I think that we should leave decisions about who is banned in the hands of SDS who built this site and the mods who run it. If we all start calling for the banning posters because we dislike their views or even style of delivery, we will be "telling on each other" and resemble a first grade class.

 

This site didn't become great by all of us sitting around spewing the same views over and over. I have good relationships with posters (one in particular who is in this thread) who I have disagreed with on numerous issues for years. And ya know what? Sometimes I was dead ass wrong and other times I was 100% on the money.

 

Its all good.

 

 

 

 

I appreciate the sentiment.

 

Isn’t “I think” implied in every post as we are all dealing in opinion here? 

 

If it puts you at ease, I’ve never had the urge to run to a mod like he was some hallway monitor. I’d rather just state my stance and move on. But yeah, they’d be busier than one legged flamenco dancers if we all ran to them to mete out justice every time we perceive a slight. 

 

Sometimes this place can resemble that first grade class. Heck, that might be an insult to first graders as this place can resemble a zoo (no insult to animals intended).

 

In this thread certain lines were crossed and I’ll leave it at that. I’m out of the fray. 

 

For now.

 

 

[BringBackFergy]

When I first read JW’s material years ago I could sense his journalistic integrity and professionalism. He expressed concerns re. Rex Ryan’s coaching, hiring practices, stories re. The future of the Bills franchise upon the passing of RWJ, and other well written articles. I imagined him as one of those “old school” reporters who didn’t rely on a laptop or cassette recorder to note the story/interview. He’d take notes in pen on (shorthand) on a small paper notebook I pictured him as a 1940’s beat journalist wearing a plaid sport jacket, a wide striped tie, a shirt with mustard stains because he eats hot dogs on-the-go, and a black fedora hat with a small white placard that says “PRESS”. I had the pleasure of meeting JW at a tailgate last year....and that image was confirmed. 

 

He’s not a shill. The guy writes a good story. Y’all need to relax.  We have bigger fish to fry, such as: What the hell is wrong with Dawson Knox??!!

[Gugny]

11 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:

When I first read JW’s material years ago I could sense his journalistic integrity and professionalism. He expressed concerns re. Rex Ryan’s coaching, hiring practices, stories re. The future of the Bills franchise upon the passing of RWJ, and other well written articles. I imagined him as one of those “old school” reporters who didn’t rely on a laptop or cassette recorder to note the story/interview. He’d take notes in pen on (shorthand) on a small paper notebook I pictured him as a 1940’s beat journalist wearing a plaid sport jacket, a wide striped tie, a shirt with mustard stains because he eats hot dogs on-the-go, and a black fedora hat with a small white placard that says “PRESS”. I had the pleasure of meeting JW at a tailgate last year....and that image was confirmed. 

 

He’s not a shill. The guy writes a good story. Y’all need to relax.  We have bigger fish to fry, such as: What the hell is wrong with Dawson Knox??!!

 

Well said.  Speaking to John at the TBDHOTs was always a personal highlight.  I've opined multiple times over the years that he's the best at covering the Bills.  I still feel the same.  I appreciate his input/interactions on this site and I hope they continue.

 

Unless it's about music.  The Replacements??  Really??

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, ScottLaw said:

Yep.

 

The OP is JWs opinion on the state of the team and how he feels about them which is fine.... but then he presented moves made by the organization as if they had no other choice, which is completely false.

We have been down this road so many times that it is exhausting. No one is arguing that there weren't different avenues to take in running the team when this new regime took over. As Gunner and others have pointed out McDermott had a blueprint on how to run the organization if he were selected for the job. His strategy was to dramatically remake the roster and cap structure. That's exactly what he has done. And as Gunner has pointed out it was done in a short time frame. 

 

As Gunner and others have  pointed out there were different strategies to take. They weren't compelled to take one approach over another. They chose the approach that best suited their vision on how to run a franchise. It's not surprising that they selected an approach that was the antithesis of the Whaley approach. That's why the owner found McDermott appealing and hired him and empowered him. 

[oldmanfan]

7 minutes ago, JohnC said:

We have been down this road so many times that it is exhausting. No one is arguing that there weren't different avenues to take in running the team when this new regime took over. As Gunner and others have pointed out McDermott had a blueprint on how to run the organization if he were selected for the job. His strategy was to dramatically remake the roster and cap structure. That's exactly what he has done. And as Gunner has pointed out it was done in a short time frame. 

 

As Gunner and others have  pointed out there were different strategies to take. They weren't compelled to take one approach over another. They chose the approach that best suited their vision on how to run a franchise. It's not surprising that they selected an approach that was the antithesis of the Whaley approach. That's why the owner found McDermott appealing and hired him and empowered him. 

It's good to see logic on this board.  McD and Beane have a plan on how to build a consistently successful championship football team.  They are implementing their plan.  Their plan involved getting rid of players they didn't think fit and taking a cap hit quickly to do so, then using their dollars to get guys they want.  If their plan works they'll be heros.  If it doesn't they'll get fired.  That is reality.

 

The other reality is if they had done what some wanted and just retooled a bit, worked around the edges, etc.  the naysayers would be on here moaning about how they should have stripped everything down, taken the cap hit all at once, etc.  Because the agenda is to argue against whatever the Bills do to look cute on a message board.

[GunnerBill]

13 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

It's good to see logic on this board.  McD and Beane have a plan on how to build a consistently successful championship football team.  They are implementing their plan.  Their plan involved getting rid of players they didn't think fit and taking a cap hit quickly to do so, then using their dollars to get guys they want.  If their plan works they'll be heros.  If it doesn't they'll get fired.  That is reality.

 

The other reality is if they had done what some wanted and just retooled a bit, worked around the edges, etc.  the naysayers would be on here moaning about how they should have stripped everything down, taken the cap hit all at once, etc.  Because the agenda is to argue against whatever the Bills do to look cute on a message board.

 

There are certainly some who would criticise them whichever approach they had taken. Their are others who would have claimed that the only route was the one they had taken (whichever that was). The only sensible way to approach it in my mind is to fairly and objectively set out the options that were available to them, recognise that their decision was fundamentally a choice and then judge them against whether that choice works out.

[Royale with Cheese]

27 minutes ago, JohnC said:

We have been down this road so many times that it is exhausting. No one is arguing that there weren't different avenues to take in running the team when this new regime took over. As Gunner and others have pointed out McDermott had a blueprint on how to run the organization if he were selected for the job. His strategy was to dramatically remake the roster and cap structure. That's exactly what he has done. And as Gunner has pointed out it was done in a short time frame. 

 

As Gunner and others have  pointed out there were different strategies to take. They weren't compelled to take one approach over another. They chose the approach that best suited their vision on how to run a franchise. It's not surprising that they selected an approach that was the antithesis of the Whaley approach. That's why the owner found McDermott appealing and hired him and empowered him. 

 

Thank you.  Scott seems to have this strong stance that McDermott can't have his own blueprint.  He needs to make it work with the previous regimes players.

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

It's good to see logic on this board.  McD and Beane have a plan on how to build a consistently successful championship football team.  They are implementing their plan.  Their plan involved getting rid of players they didn't think fit and taking a cap hit quickly to do so, then using their dollars to get guys they want.  If their plan works they'll be heros.  If it doesn't they'll get fired.  That is reality.

 

The other reality is if they had done what some wanted and just retooled a bit, worked around the edges, etc.  the naysayers would be on here moaning about how they should have stripped everything down, taken the cap hit all at once, etc.  Because the agenda is to argue against whatever the Bills do to look cute on a message board.

Right from the start McDermott and company were very open and explicit in stating what their intentions were. And everything they have done starting with trading Watkins demonstrated that this regime was determined to implement its plan. There was no hidden agenda. There was little mishmash in their approach. The hymn book they were singing from was an open book that everyone can see and hear. 

 

Those who argue that there was more than one way to run the operation are creating a false argument. Of course there were different approaches to take. Who is saying otherwise? When you decide to take a route and take it what is the purpose of continuing to harangue that there were other routes to take? It's a pointless discussion. 

[K-9]

1 hour ago, BringBackFergy said:

When I first read JW’s material years ago I could sense his journalistic integrity and professionalism. He expressed concerns re. Rex Ryan’s coaching, hiring practices, stories re. The future of the Bills franchise upon the passing of RWJ, and other well written articles. I imagined him as one of those “old school” reporters who didn’t rely on a laptop or cassette recorder to note the story/interview. He’d take notes in pen on (shorthand) on a small paper notebook I pictured him as a 1940’s beat journalist wearing a plaid sport jacket, a wide striped tie, a shirt with mustard stains because he eats hot dogs on-the-go, and a black fedora hat with a small white placard that says “PRESS”. I had the pleasure of meeting JW at a tailgate last year....and that image was confirmed. 

 

He’s not a shill. The guy writes a good story. Y’all need to relax.  We have bigger fish to fry, such as: What the hell is wrong with Dawson Knox??!!

Well done, BBF.

 

It helps to familiarize oneself with his work before spouting off and insulting his professionalism. 

[teef]

this thread turned into quite an abortion.  nicely done.

[oldmanfan]

19 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

There are certainly some who would criticise them whichever approach they had taken. Their are others who would have claimed that the only route was the one they had taken (whichever that was). The only sensible way to approach it in my mind is to fairly and objectively set out the options that were available to them, recognise that their decision was fundamentally a choice and then judge them against whether that choice works out.

Exactly.  They are no different than any other team.   They have a plan and we'll see if they're right or wrong.

[eball]

20 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Thank you.  Scott seems to have this strong stance that McDermott can't have his own blueprint.  He needs to make it work with the previous regimes players.

 

Is that BADOL's name -- Scott?  That's hilarious, since ScottLaw is the puppy always nipping at his heels for approval!

[K-9]

46 minutes ago, JohnC said:

We have been down this road so many times that it is exhausting. No one is arguing that there weren't different avenues to take in running the team when this new regime took over. As Gunner and others have pointed out McDermott had a blueprint on how to run the organization if he were selected for the job. His strategy was to dramatically remake the roster and cap structure. That's exactly what he has done. And as Gunner has pointed out it was done in a short time frame. 

 

As Gunner and others have  pointed out there were different strategies to take. They weren't compelled to take one approach over another. They chose the approach that best suited their vision on how to run a franchise. It's not surprising that they selected an approach that was the antithesis of the Whaley approach. That's why the owner found McDermott appealing and hired him and empowered him. 

C’mon, John. Don’t you know that if they choose an option we don’t agree with, it’s automatically the wrong choice? And that there is no need to await the outcomes?

 

Seriously though, good post. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, teef said:

this thread turned into quite an abortion.  nicely done.

Thank God we are not in Alabama then. 

[K-9]

23 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

There are certainly some who would criticise them whichever approach they had taken. Their are others who would have claimed that the only route was the one they had taken (whichever that was). The only sensible way to approach it in my mind is to fairly and objectively set out the options that were available to them, recognise that their decision was fundamentally a choice and then judge them against whether that choice works out.

Absolutely. 

 

Question: do you think the Bills braintrust set out and analyzed the options available before deciding on their ultimate course of action? 

 

“Whether the choice works out” is an interesting concept as it depends on one’s own preferable time frame for it to work out. For some it was yesterday, for others it must be this season, still others might give them several more seasons as additional pieces are added. 

2 hours ago, GG said:

 

Or at least move the thread to PPP for the full discussion to unfold

I don’t think it needs to go there. Especially since several posters would refuse to enter that cesspool to continue the discussion. 

[oldmanfan]

Just now, K-9 said:

Absolutely. 

 

Question: do you think the Bills braintrust set out and analyzed the options available before deciding on their ultimate course of action? 

 

“Whether the choice works out” is an interesting concept as it depends on one’s own preferable time frame for it to work out. For some it was yesterday, for others it must be this season, still others might give them several more seasons as additional pieces are added. 

Of course not.  Don't you know that the Bills organization doesn't think about things?  They just come up with ideas in a dream and then put them into action with no forethought at all.  And that stands regardless of the GM, owner, etc. etc.  Because Beane is Whaley is Nix is Brandon is Marv is Donahoe is Butler is Polian, and on down the line.  Much like Pegula is Ralph.  And how McD ultimately is the same as Buster Ramsay.  Because the faults of any previous Bills coach, GM, owner, etc.  are to be blamed on whomever occupies the positions currently.  It's why the naysayers continue to evoke memories of the past to curse the guys there now.   

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

C’mon, John. Don’t you know that if they choose an option we don’t agree with, it’s automatically the wrong choice? And that there is no need to await the outcomes?

 

Seriously though, good post. 

 

 

It's the yin and yang syndrome. When one person says up the other person instinctively says down. 

 

What is surprising about this topic is how people perceive success vs failure. In my eyes entering the third season this regime has dramatically remade the roster and restructured the cap that has given this franchise the flexibility to engage in the market. In the first year of McDermott's tenure he took a stripped down team into the playoffs for the first time in a generation. In the second year of operation this regime successfully maneuvered prior to the draft and during the draft to acquire its franchise qb. This organization didn't have a franchise qb for nearly a quarter century, since the Kelly era. And it is noticeable that outside commentators are finally describing our franchise in positive terms instead of bleak terms. If that is not progress then I don't know what it is. 

[Bill from NYC]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Of course not.  Don't you know that the Bills organization doesn't think about things?  They just come up with ideas in a dream and then put them into action with no forethought at all.  And that stands regardless of the GM, owner, etc. etc.  Because Beane is Whaley is Nix is Brandon is Marv is Donahoe is Butler is Polian, and on down the line.  Much like Pegula is Ralph.  And how McD ultimately is the same as Buster Ramsay.  Because the faults of any previous Bills coach, GM, owner, etc.  are to be blamed on whomever occupies the positions currently.  It's why the naysayers continue to evoke memories of the past to curse the guys there now.   

Why don't we simplify things.....give us a list of what we are allowed to think and post so we all can make sure we meet your standards. If we have any questions we will seek clarification so please stay on call.

Thanks.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

It's the yin and yang syndrome. When one person says up the other person instinctively says down. 

 

What is surprising about this topic is how people perceive success vs failure. In my eyes entering the third season this regime has dramatically remade the roster and restructured the cap that has given this franchise the flexibility to engage in the market. In the first year of McDermott's tenure he took a stripped down team into the playoffs for the first time in a generation. In the second year of operation this regime successfully maneuvered prior to the draft and during the draft to acquire its franchise qb. This organization didn't have a franchise qb for nearly a quarter century, since the Kelly era. And it is noticeable that outside commentators are finally describing our franchise in positive terms instead of bleak terms. If that is not progress then I don't know what it is. 

But,but but but - you have to show me the baby!!!!!

Just now, Bill from NYC said:

Why don't we simplify things.....give us a list of what we are allowed to think and post so we all can make sure we meet your standards. If we have any questions we will seek clarification so please stay on call.

Thanks.

You can think and post what you want.  I can comment on them.  Quit being ridiculous. 

[K-9]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Of course not.  Don't you know that the Bills organization doesn't think about things?  They just come up with ideas in a dream and then put them into action with no forethought at all.  And that stands regardless of the GM, owner, etc. etc.  Because Beane is Whaley is Nix is Brandon is Marv is Donahoe is Butler is Polian, and on down the line.  Much like Pegula is Ralph.  And how McD ultimately is the same as Buster Ramsay.  Because the faults of any previous Bills coach, GM, owner, etc.  are to be blamed on whomever occupies the positions currently.  It's why the naysayers continue to evoke memories of the past to curse the guys there now.   

While my question was rhetorical, I’m glad you embellished the absurdity of it. 

 

But i don’t want @GunnerBill to get the wrong impression of my rhetorical question as he is one of the most level headed contributors to this forum. 

[Bill from NYC]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

 

You can think and post what you want. 

Thanks.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Bill from NYC said:

Thanks.

And I'll comment on them.  As you can comment on mine. 

2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

While my question was rhetorical, I’m glad you embellished the absurdity of it. 

 

But i don’t want @GunnerBill to get the wrong impression of my rhetorical question as he is one of the most level headed contributors to this forum. 

Agreed.  I'm grouchy this morning for some reason.  Gunner gets it.  Ultimately they have their plan, and it will succeed or not.  My gripe is the assumption by some that it won't succeed.  Time will  tell.

[Bill from NYC]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

It's the yin and yang syndrome. When one person says up the other person instinctively says down. 

 

What is surprising about this topic is how people perceive success vs failure. In my eyes entering the third season this regime has dramatically remade the roster and restructured the cap that has given this franchise the flexibility to engage in the market. In the first year of McDermott's tenure he took a stripped down team into the playoffs for the first time in a generation. In the second year of operation this regime successfully maneuvered prior to the draft and during the draft to acquire its franchise qb. This organization didn't have a franchise qb for nearly a quarter century, since the Kelly era. And it is noticeable that outside commentators are finally describing our franchise in positive terms instead of bleak terms. If that is not progress then I don't know what it is. 

And you might be right about all of the above John. Lets hope so.

 

Otoh I thought that Rob Johnson would be a franchise QB. You (at one time) thought that Spiller was a great draft pick.

 

My entire point is that differing opinions are a good thing, interesting, and I think a vital element of what makes this board a good place to be.

[K-9]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

It's the yin and yang syndrome. When one person says up the other person instinctively says down. 

 

What is surprising about this topic is how people perceive success vs failure. In my eyes entering the third season this regime has dramatically remade the roster and restructured the cap that has given this franchise the flexibility to engage in the market. In the first year of McDermott's tenure he took a stripped down team into the playoffs for the first time in a generation. In the second year of operation this regime successfully maneuvered prior to the draft and during the draft to acquire its franchise qb. This organization didn't have a franchise qb for nearly a quarter century, since the Kelly era. And it is noticeable that outside commentators are finally describing our franchise in positive terms instead of bleak terms. If that is not progress then I don't know what it is. 

You mean like when one person says Housley is a clueless idiot and the other person says it’s not him, but the talent??

 

Regarding this regime’s roster shaping, it’s not entirely unlike the mid 80s when Polian and Co. undertook a similar tactic. 

 

Que the “now you’re comparing Beane to Polian, LMFAO” mob and their righteous indignation to the mere placement of Beane’s name in the same sentence with Polian’s. 

 

 But I see some similarities. I just wish we were all as certain about Josh as we were about Jimbo back in the day. That’s the key, regardless. 

 

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

And you might be right about all of the above John. Lets hope so.

 

Otoh I thought that Rob Johnson would be a franchise QB. You (at one time) thought that Spiller was a great draft pick.

 

My entire point is that differing opinions are a good thing, interesting, and I think a vital element of what makes this board a good place to be.

Absolutely.  For the record I thought Edwards was the answer.

[Bill from NYC]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Absolutely.  For the record I thought Edwards was the answer.

I wanted the Bills to draft Ryan Mallett. I still think that he has the best arm in the NFL but he is a horror show.

 

That said, I would have drafted 100x better than Levy/Jauron. So would a 13 year old kid with a copy of Pro Football Weekly.

 

This is why some fans are disgusted and skeptical.

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

We have been down this road so many times that it is exhausting. No one is arguing that there weren't different avenues to take in running the team when this new regime took over. As Gunner and others have pointed out McDermott had a blueprint on how to run the organization if he were selected for the job. His strategy was to dramatically remake the roster and cap structure. That's exactly what he has done. And as Gunner has pointed out it was done in a short time frame. 

 

As Gunner and others have  pointed out there were different strategies to take. They weren't compelled to take one approach over another. They chose the approach that best suited their vision on how to run a franchise. It's not surprising that they selected an approach that was the antithesis of the Whaley approach. That's why the owner found McDermott appealing and hired him and empowered him. 

 

I look into this thread from time to time and have been tempted to add my two cents worth.

 

This is post is a nice statement of some of what I've been thinking as I've read the criticism that McBeane could have and should have done something different.  The question with any GM and any coach is whether he succeeded.   If he succeeded, it's not relevant that he might have taken a different path to success.  It isn't even relevant if some other path might have gotten him there more quickly.  All that matters is winning.  

 

It isn't possible to know yet whether McBeane will succeed.  Discussion about other things they might have done may be interesting to some, but unless you think the the Bills are in a bad place or heading in the wrong direction, discussion of other things that might have been done isn't very to interesting to most people. 

 

I very much like the point that McDermott came in with some very well defined ideas about how to run a football team, and Beane did too.  It makes little sense to criticize them for making decisions based on those ideas - they were hired BECAUSE they had those ideas, and to criticize for not acting contrary to the ideas is stupid.  

 

I think people also tend to forget that McDermott is young, had never been a head coach before and decided (probably) that he was going to go slowly in the beginning.  He was going to get his feet wet and understand the lay of the land before he took major steps.  That's a prudent thing for someone to do when he's new at a job.  So, for example, I will not fault him for not going after Mahomes or Watson.  He didn't know what he had in Taylor, he didn't know the extent to which he could trust Whaley's judgment or the scouting staff, he probably knew he would be getting a new GM.   He wasn't going to make the single most important player personnel decision in that kind of environment.   

 

As for decisions other than QB, he wanted to evaluate players before he decided whether he had the guys he wanted to work with.  That takes time.  

 

His oft-stated philosophy, one that Beane shares, is that it's better to build a team right than to build it quickly.   They want long-term success, which in their view has to be built on a solid foundation.  McDermott first want to evaluate what he had, then make changes accordingly.   If that meant taking a year or two more to put up some winning seasons, they were willing to wait.  And I am sure they explained that the Pegulas, who bought the program.  McBeane weren't intending quick fixes, and the Pegulas agreed. 

 

None of that means that there weren't other ways to go about running the team and building a winner.   What it does mean is that they had and they have a process, and criticizing them for doing things that would have been inconsistent with the process is foolish.   What matter is long term results, and that story hasn't been told yet.   And, by the way, the Allen vs. Watson and Mahomes story hasn't been told yet, either.   

[oldmanfan]

7 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

I wanted the Bills to draft Ryan Mallett. I still think that he has the best arm in the NFL but he is a horror show.

 

That said, I would have drafted 100x better than Levy/Jauron. So would a 13 year old kid with a copy of Pro Football Weekly.

 

This is why some fans are disgusted and skeptical.

To me it all started with Tom Donahoe.  Ralph reached outside the organization for him, and when he didn't succeed Ralph (or maybe Litman; I think the great untold story in the 17 year failure was Litman's influence on an aging owner) was not going to go outside again.  So that begat Marv, who had no business being a GM, who hired Jauron, who proved the point that a great coordinator doesn't make a great HC, which begat Nix, and so on, and so on.

 

That's why I divorce anything that has happened since the Pegulas took over from done under Ralph.  They've made their share of mistakes (Rex???), but it's comparing apples and oranges.

[Bill from NYC]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

To me it all started with Tom Donahoe.  Ralph reached outside the organization for him, and when he didn't succeed Ralph (or maybe Litman; I think the great untold story in the 17 year failure was Litman's influence on an aging owner) was not going to go outside again.  So that begat Marv, who had no business being a GM, who hired Jauron, who proved the point that a great coordinator doesn't make a great HC, which begat Nix, and so on, and so on.

 

That's why I divorce anything that has happened since the Pegulas took over from done under Ralph.  They've made their share of mistakes (Rex???), but it's comparing apples and oranges.

A case could be made that when Marv was still the coach and the superstars were getting old, he failed to plan on replacing them and drafted corners. His focus was on the secondary and special teams. Just unbelievable.

 

Apples and oranges? Good chance but I excuse skepticism.

 

[oldmanfan]

11 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

A case could be made that when Marv was still the coach and the superstars were getting old, he failed to plan on replacing them and drafted corners. His focus was on the secondary and special teams. Just unbelievable.

 

Apples and oranges? Good chance but I excuse skepticism.

 

It is probably blasphemy around here but I don't see how Marv got into the Hall, at least as quickly as he did.  I think coaching lost the first and fourth SBs.

[Bill from NYC]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

It is probably blasphemy around here but I don't see how Marv got into the Hall, at least as quickly as he did.  I think coaching lost the first and fourth SBs.

But look at what you said OMF. This is why we need different opinions on this board.

 

Btw I agree.

[Royale with Cheese]

6 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

It is probably blasphemy around here but I don't see how Marv got into the Hall, at least as quickly as he did.  I think coaching lost the first and fourth SBs.

 

I think we were severely out coached in all the Super Bowls....the first one I put on Marv more than anyone.  

[BADOLBILZ]

2 hours ago, BringBackFergy said:

When I first read JW’s material years ago I could sense his journalistic integrity and professionalism. He expressed concerns re. Rex Ryan’s coaching, hiring practices, stories re. The future of the Bills franchise upon the passing of RWJ, and other well written articles. I imagined him as one of those “old school” reporters who didn’t rely on a laptop or cassette recorder to note the story/interview. He’d take notes in pen on (shorthand) on a small paper notebook I pictured him as a 1940’s beat journalist wearing a plaid sport jacket, a wide striped tie, a shirt with mustard stains because he eats hot dogs on-the-go, and a black fedora hat with a small white placard that says “PRESS”. I had the pleasure of meeting JW at a tailgate last year....and that image was confirmed. 

 

He’s not a shill. The guy writes a good story. Y’all need to relax.  We have bigger fish to fry, such as: What the hell is wrong with Dawson Knox??!!

 

 

I don't disagree with anything you said here.

 

But keep in mind that "1940's beat journalists" are mostly remembered for forging mutual back-washing relationships with those that they covered and often hiding some seriously messed up sh*t from the public.

 

I certainly don't think that about JW.

 

Here's the reality though..........when you create a thread on TSW to present an opinion..........you are going to get asked questions from whoever shows up and if you are evasive or condescending the line of questioning will reflect that.

 

JW presented the opinions of those he covers as if they were facts and refused to admit that he was giving them a benefit of the doubt.

 

Why?  I don't know.  Maybe he didn't want to look like any other Joe hot-take.

 

Only after he resorted to the "fan forum N word" did this thread get ugly in the opinion of some(though to me it's just colorful banter).

 

Once JW got the reverse treatment.......after some  outrage.......he fessed up that "he gives everyone he covers the benefit of the doubt"............though I am unsure if that's actually the case this deep into a regime...........I don't remember a universal BOD given to Rex when he was 15-15 and entering a must win game versus the Dolphins.

 

If anyone thinks I am going out of my way to attack JW........please..........the only sustained timeout I've ever received on TSW(1 week?) was for defending JW against a moderator here who I felt was badgering him.

 

I believe it was over his defense of his friends/colleagues in the media regarding their aggressive line of questioning of Doug Whaley after the Rex firing.........which I find rather amusing in light of Jdub's handling of questions in this thread.

 

Bottom line...........it's all good.  So Tier isn't throwing himself either.   The people losing their minds are the low hanging fruit(as a mod once called them)...........the easily outraged........or at least the few that I can actually see on my screen since I don't pick the particularly moldy peaches anymore.    

 

In short, it took some effort but JW finally answered the question he didn't want to.

 

At the risk of further exposing my chronic narcissism let me say that "I" actually hold no personal grudge against anyone in this thread......not even the powdery peaches(I just have to block you for moderation purposes)....."I" bust balls for a cause but it's all entertainment and "I" have nothin' but love for my fellow Bills fans even if that thought offends you.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

Absolutely. 

 

Question: do you think the Bills braintrust set out and analyzed the options available before deciding on their ultimate course of action? 

 

“Whether the choice works out” is an interesting concept as it depends on one’s own preferable time frame for it to work out. For some it was yesterday, for others it must be this season, still others might give them several more seasons as additional pieces are added. 

 

I do. Of course. As for when does it have to pay off... I think if it hasn't by the end of 2020 and the Bills don't look like a team who can do anymore than squeeze into the playoffs and lose in the first round then probably it will have failed. Because they were already that team who could win 8 or 9 games, what they weren't was a contender. The point of the tear down was to build a contender.  

[BADOLBILZ]

28 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I do. Of course. As for when does it have to pay off... I think if it hasn't by the end of 2020 and the Bills don't look like a team who can do anymore than squeeze into the playoffs and lose in the first round then probably it will have failed. Because they were already that team who could win 8 or 9 games, what they weren't was a contender. The point of the tear down was to build a contender.  

 

 

Yeah 4 years of mediocrity would be a failure exceeding all in the 2000's save for the Jauron regime(on par).

 

Especially considering that's where they started(and only did so because they felt the roster was BETTER than that and the coaching was suspect).

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, Bill from NYC said:

A case could be made that when Marv was still the coach and the superstars were getting old, he failed to plan on replacing them and drafted corners. His focus was on the secondary and special teams. Just unbelievable.

 

Apples and oranges? Good chance but I excuse skepticism.

 

 

 

I used to believe that you couldn't go broke making a profit on draft day back in the 1990's...........but in truth that only applies if you already have the studs in place.     The Bills were lucky that they got so much mileage out of guys like Bruce and Andre and Thurman........that allowed them to take a few lower ceiling impact guys and sustain their competitiveness and finish the 1990's as the winningest team of the decade.     The current Bills gotta' find those 10-15 year guys.   Hopefully we have a 15-20 year guy in Allen.

[K-9]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

It is probably blasphemy around here but I don't see how Marv got into the Hall, at least as quickly as he did.  I think coaching lost the first and fourth SBs.

That’s a fair criticism and one I think Marv would agree with, btw. 

[Rico]

Fun thread. 

 

The important thing to remember is that, even though it took awhile, the stench of Ralph & his stooges is just about gone now.

 

Bless you Pegs, bless you McD, bless you Beane. Whether or not you ultimately succeed, you will always be near and dear to my heart. 

[Delete This Account]

5 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

I don't owe Wawrow any apology.  I criticized his article because I felt that he was simply repeating "the company line" from the Bills FO and he took exception to that.  That's fine.  It's a discussion.  Since then, however, he's personally insulted me at least twice.  He's also personally insulted/attacked other posters who dared criticize his views.  In this thread, he's repeatedly wrapped himself in his professional connections/knowledge when making his case for his views, but he's repeated sunk to ad hominem attacks on those who disagree with his views.  That's most unprofessional.  

 

PS -- I'm not surprised that you're taking up his cause since you, too, apparently have difficulty with opinions that don't mirror your own.

 

hey, bubba. i didn't start this thread.

but since it reflects and outlines the views I expressed, i've chosen to take part in it.

 

1. i thought i personally insulted you at least three times.

2. i also personally insulted one other poster, whose coat-tails you appear to be riding, as you've really offered up little that's original to this discussion.

3. the above is not an ad hominem attack as it pertains directly to the discussion we're having.

4. you're not criticizing an article, but instead a series of tweets that were shared.

5. at least i have a profession to be unprofessional, unlike you it seems.

6. that would be me personally insulting you a fourth time i believe.

 

jw

 

Edited June 4, 2019 by john wawrow

[dave mcbride]

5 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

hey, bubba. i didn't start this thread.

but since it reflects and outlines the views I expressed, i've chosen to take part in it.

 

1. i thought i personally insulted you at least three times.

2. i also personally insulted one other poster, whose coat-tails you appear to be riding, as you've really offered up little that's original to this discussion.

3. the above is not an ad hominem attack as it pertains directly to the discussion we're having.

4. you're not criticizing an article, but instead a series of tweets that were shared.

5. at least i have a profession to be unprofessional, unlike you it seems.

6. that would be me personally insulting you a fourth time i believe.

 

jw

 

To lighten the mood here, John, you should really listen to the lyrics to this song. I have a hunch you'll dig it: