Sean McDermott is the 2nd Best Coach in Bills History

[teef]

19 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

No, I expect more.....  I have said too that I'm turing the corner on McD (but you ignore that), but I'm not that enamoured with many things 2017-19 or the record or the playoff appearances.

 

As for Allen, I will repeat again and compare him to Burrow & Herbert, where I'm sure you'll compare him to Darnold, Mayfield & Rosen (and you maybe right or maybe I am)......  My view always was that they were too conservative with Allen and he could have been brought along quicker, which may have resulted in a different outcome vs. Houston.  

 

The fact McD is maybe the olny coach in the last 25 years not to have a QB throw for 300 yards in a game to me is telling.  

again, do you think it was mcd telling allen not to throw for 300 yards, or do you think allen just didn't have that ability to do that yet, (at least safely).  i think some fans just haven't seen a qb developed properly here, and it's confusing.  if they forced allen to win with his arm his first couple of years here, it could have been disastrous for the team, and allen.  

 

houston was a tough one to watch i agree, and i certainly don't absolve the coaching staff, but consider it a learning opportunity.  i expect this team to be a regular playoff participant, so we'll see.  remember, houston lost their two previous playoff appearances before beating the bills.  hell, andy reid would have been considered one of the biggest playoff chokers if he lost the superbowl.  

 

not everything happens over night.  

26 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

He has advocated for the Bills to lose.  That’s all you need to know.

oh i know.  the thought process is amazing.  

[Billsfan1972]

14 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

He has advocated for the Bills to lose.  That’s all you need to know.

I never did.  I advocated being entertained watching the Bills.  A win alone does not mean the game was exciting or fun to watch.

 

Too often 2017-19 Bills games were terrible to watch.  Forget the blowout losses.  

 

And actually because you keep harping.  If you are not making the SB or are knocked out the first playoff game & since I invest 16 weeks watching & cheering for the Bills wanting them to go 16-0, I'd really like to have more games that were more entertaining then the many of the games were.

 

I will continue to use the Pittsburgh game as a shining example of a game Buffalo won, but McD did everything he could wrt the offense to make it a terribly bad game to watch.

 

Can add the 14-7 Tennessee game too (along with other wins the Bills had).

 

I you don't get it, I give up.  I am no longer responding to your posts.

 

But keep reiterating this. 

8 minutes ago, teef said:

again, do you think it was mcd telling allen not to throw for 300 yards, or do you think allen just didn't have that ability to do that yet, (at least safely).  i think some fans just haven't seen a qb developed properly here, and it's confusing.  if they forced allen to win with his arm his first couple of years here, it could have been disastrous for the team, and allen.  

 

houston was a tough one to watch i agree, and i certainly don't absolve the coaching staff, but consider it a learning opportunity.  i expect this team to be a regular playoff participant, so we'll see.  remember, houston lost their two previous playoff appearances before beating the bills.  hell, andy reid would have been considered one of the biggest playoff chokers if he lost the superbowl.  

 

not everything happens over night.  

oh i know.  the thought process is amazing.  

And you know that how? Conversely he could have been further ahead, more poised & confident and they beat Houston.  No one knows.

 

And again EVERY COACH IN THE NFL has had their team throw for 300+ yards every year 2017-19 but McD, who wasn't able to do it once.  And not every QB was a HOF'er. 

[dollars 2 donuts]

 

1964 American Football League Champions

 

1965 American Football League Champions

[teef]

14 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

 

And you know that how? Conversely he could have been further ahead, more poised & confident and they beat Houston.  No one knows.

 

And again EVERY COACH IN THE NFL has had their team throw for 300+ yards every year 2017-19 but McD, who wasn't able to do it once.  And not every QB was a HOF'er. 

i obviously don't know that, but it's a pretty obvious assumption.  we all heard how inaccurate allen was and always would be.  do you think forcing him to throw 35 plus times a game would have been good?  probably not.  each qb is different, and each team is different.  on top of that...300 yard throwing games doesn't matter to anyone except you.  it's not a measure of success in any way, yet you use it to evaluate the coach, and not the qb.  

 

i asked this before...do you think dallas fans were happy with their losses because dak threw for qaudy numbers?  if you listen to around the league, they were not.

17 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

I never did.  I advocated being entertained watching the Bills.  A win alone does not mean the game was exciting or fun to watch.

 

Too often 2017-19 Bills games were terrible to watch.  Forget the blowout losses.  

 

And actually because you keep harping.  If you are not making the SB or are knocked out the first playoff game & since I invest 16 weeks watching & cheering for the Bills wanting them to go 16-0, I'd really like to have more games that were more entertaining then the many of the games were.

 

I will continue to use the Pittsburgh game as a shining example of a game Buffalo won, but McD did everything he could wrt the offense to make it a terribly bad game to watch.

 

Can add the 14-7 Tennessee game too (along with other wins the Bills had).

 

I you don't get it, I give up.  I am no longer responding to your posts.

 

But keep reiterating this. 

 

and to comment on the bolded...that's just you.  i loved watching the team i grew up with make it to the playoffs twice.  

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, teef said:

i obviously don't know that, but it's a pretty obvious assumption.  we all heard how inaccurate allen was and always would be.  do you think forcing him to throw 35 plus times a game would have been good?  probably not.  each qb is different, and each team is different.  on top of that...300 yard throwing games doesn't matter to anyone except you.  it's not a measure of success in any way, yet you use it to evaluate the coach, and not the qb.  

 

i asked this before...do you think dallas fans were happy with their losses because dak threw for qaudy numbers?  if you listen to around the league, they were not.

It’s about entertainment and not victories with this guy.  If he were a Chiefs fan he’d have complained about the game a couple weeks ago because they ran the ball to do so.

 

He specifically stated last year he’d rather see the Bills lose as long as they had 300 yards passing.  Just really sad.

[Billsfan1972]

11 minutes ago, teef said:

i obviously don't know that, but it's a pretty obvious assumption.  we all heard how inaccurate allen was and always would be.  do you think forcing him to throw 35 plus times a game would have been good?  probably not.  each qb is different, and each team is different.  on top of that...300 yard throwing games doesn't matter to anyone except you.  it's not a measure of success in any way, yet you use it to evaluate the coach, and not the qb.  

 

i asked this before...do you think dallas fans were happy with their losses because dak threw for qaudy numbers?  if you listen to around the league, they were not.

and to comment on the bolded...that's just you.  i loved watching the team i grew up with make it to the playoffs twice.  

No one is happy when their team loses, that is a given.....  But many of the Dallas losses were exciting fun games. 

 

Name me a game the Bills lost during McD's first 3 years thgat was a compelling, exciting game as a Bills fan.  Most were boring games imo, with McD's main goal being to keep the score down and the game between the 20's.... 

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

4 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

No one is happy when their team loses, that is a given.....  But many of the Dallas losses were exciting fun games. 

 

Name me a game the Bills lost during McD's first 3 years thgat was a compelling, exciting game as a Bills fan.  Most were boring games imo, with McD's main goal being to keep the score down and the game between the 20's.... 

I know some of you gals don't like to hear it.  but why do you constantly, constantly put this team down, yet claim to be a fan of the buffalo bills?

 

why?

 

outside looking in, you look like the furthest thing from a buffalo bills fan and more and more like Nancy.

 

oh well, I guess you like to use this board as some kind of therapy, a source for you to complain I suppose.

 

[dave mcbride]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I put a lot more stock into turning around moribund franchises......which is why Kox is #1 and Saban #2.

 

Levy fell in just as the Bills were getting to the point where they were too talented to deny success..........and while he did pull it together and manage the personalities.........that was one of his few strengths.

 

Knox turned programs around the way McDermott is trying to do here..........including hiring the underrated people who ultimately helped build the foundation for Polian,  who gets just a little too much credit for the foundation of the roster that made it to 4 SB's.

 

The scope of what Knox brought to an organization was just so much broader than what Levy did at his only successful NFL stop.

 

And let's be honest here........Knox never had a QB like Jim Kelly and his Rams teams were impeded by Roger Staubach and Fran Tarkenton......HOF'ers.  

 

But like I said it's not a GREAT list.

 

Bills have never had a GREAT HC.

 

And fwiw..........Marrone may have got to 9-7 because the Pats were resting........but he most certainly turned around a very sickly franchise and he hired two very successful DC's in two years.  Mularkey inherited a team that was talented and the coaching job he did in his second season was tragically bad.   Marrone never had that problem in Buffalo and he took a team to a conference championship game elsewhere.   I would take that over anything Mularkey and Jauron could spin cobble together.

John Hadl had a great season in 1973 (literally a first team all pro) and was a very good qb (borderline HOFer given the QB stats of that era). The 12-2 Rams finished number one in both offense and defense that year but were disposed of easily in the first round. James Harris and Pat Haden both had pro bowl seasons under him (justifiably based on their stats) and they were a top 5 defense every year (including 3 #1 finishes). He choked in the playoffs. It's why he was fired despite the great record. He could never, ever get over the hump. His conservatism killed him against Landry, who was way more creative. 

 

Also, the Rams franchise he took over wasn't moribund. They had had winning records in 6 of the previous 7 seasons including an 11-1-2 finish, an 11-3 finish, and a 10-3-1 finish. 

 

Also, sure, Levy came into some good players, but the Bills were literally 6-35 in the 2.5 seasons before he came on. They were AWFUL.

Edited October 28, 2020 by dave mcbride

[Billsfan1972]

20 minutes ago, A Firm Tree Does Not Fear said:

I know some of you gals don't like to hear it.  but why do you constantly, constantly put this team down, yet claim to be a fan of the buffalo bills?

 

why?

 

outside looking in, you look like the furthest thing from a buffalo bills fan and more and more like Nancy.

 

oh well, I guess you like to use this board as some kind of therapy, a source for you to complain I suppose.

 

Great sexist response....😡

 

Am I supposed to cheer and agree with everything Buffalo does?

 

Go through all my posts & you'll see yep I pretty much stay on topic......  Because these are the things that most interest me and bother me.

 

1. Was very unhappy with the team & their offense

2. Have always supported Allen and just wanted them to give him more reign and see what he could do.

3. Yep throw for 300 yards sometime between 2017-19

4. Thought the trade of Watkins was ridiculous and helped decimate the Offense and liittle attempt to replace him or help the offense.  Oh yea the 2016 team went into week 16 with a chance to make the playoffs and screwed up terribly vs. the Dolphins (Tyrod threw for 300 yards that game).

5. Disliked McD's Defense only philosophy & play the game between the 20's, close to the vest....

6. Thought the tough talk & The Process is so overblown

7. Peterman experiemnt and then doubling down in 2018 showed how little he knew or was interested in the Offense.....

 

Anything I'm missing?

Edited October 28, 2020 by Billsfan1972

[teef]

33 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

No one is happy when their team loses, that is a given.....  But many of the Dallas losses were exciting fun games. 

 

Name me a game the Bills lost during McD's first 3 years thgat was a compelling, exciting game as a Bills fan.  Most were boring games imo, with McD's main goal being to keep the score down and the game between the 20's.... 

i find every single win exciting, no matter how it happens.  i'll never find a loss, not matter how many yards or point are scored, exciting.  i think that the difference between you and everyone else.    wins are good, losses are bad.  quantify them if you want.

46 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

It’s about entertainment and not victories with this guy.  If he were a Chiefs fan he’d have complained about the game a couple weeks ago because they ran the ball to do so.

 

He specifically stated last year he’d rather see the Bills lose as long as they had 300 yards passing.  Just really sad.

i just don't find any loss exciting...ever.

[Billsfan1972]

6 minutes ago, teef said:

i find every single win exciting, no matter how it happens.  i'll never find a loss, not matter how many yards or point are scored, exciting.  i think that the difference between you and everyone else.    wins are good, losses are bad.  quantify them if you want.

i just don't find any loss exciting...ever.

I am happy when the Bills win, I am not necessarily excited and truth be told not necessarily entertained either.  

 

Never been bored by a Bills win ever?

 

Agree to disagree..... 

[BUFFALOKIE]

1 hour ago, teef said:

i find every single win exciting, no matter how it happens.  i'll never find a loss, not matter how many yards or point are scored, exciting.  i think that the difference between you and everyone else.    wins are good, losses are bad.  quantify them if you want.

i just don't find any loss exciting...ever.

 

Uhhhm, you're some smart guy, right? Exciting, does not mean enjoyable. I get excited EVERY. SINGLE. GAME. Happy/Sad is the usual outcome, but excitement (for me) is never questioned. Other than that, I must agree with every other point you have made in this thread.

[billsfan_34]

20 hours ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:

Not even close Marv Levy, Lou Saban, Chuck Knox

Yep! McD has a long way to go. 

[Meatloaf63]

9 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

 

If using Streength of Schedule the Bills are the one's actually benefitting playing NE 2X/yr or thbey'd be weaker.  Also NE plays the first place schedule.

 

 

How so.....  Brouught up other coaches & the top 4 are pretty much no doubters right now.  McD at 25-23 (now 30-25) without a signature win & a 3-17 record vs. playoff teams is not close & really a silly premise.

It doesn’t make for a good forum when mods are ridiculing posts because they don’t agree. Your thoughts are a lot closer to the truth, but the OP has the right to state his opinion, the board can discuss the merits to arrive at a conclusion...

[DDCC]

This is the most ridiculous comment I heard in a long time.  Here is the appropriate ranking of Bills coaches:  Lou Saban- only coach to lead team to a championship. Back to back. Yes it was the AFL but still a Championship, marv Levy 4 super bows. Enough said,  Chuck Knox. If we had spent money, we would have gone to super bowl, Wade Phillips and then McDermott.  There u fo

[SoTier]

11 hours ago, Greg S said:

It was before my time but I would put Saban #1. He was the coach during the Bills greatest era during the back to back AFL championships in 64, 65. After that I would put Knox then Levy as #2 and #3.

 

Saban came back to the Bills to coach from 1972 through the first 5 games of 1976 and made a star of OJ Simpson (in 1973 Simpson ran for 2003 yards in a 14 game season).  In 1974, he got the Bills into the playoffs for the first time since 1966.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

20 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

1.Knox

2.Saban

3.Levy

4.Phillips

5.McDermott

6.Marrone

 

Right now he is closing in on Phillips, but not there yet, IMO.

 

Phillips really lacked the attention to detail to be a stud HC.......but he was also a "take what I have and make it work.....and build my schemes around the talent" coach......which is extremely valuable.

 

McDermott totally botched his first OC hire and he doesn't adapt his defensive scheme to his players.......he has to have HIS players.   That has lead to them creating unbelievable dead money to clear the decks and then pretty much spending it all again and still not having nailed it.   He is 0-6 versus his top rival and his record versus winning teams is atrocious.......so obviously he is this close to the top because this list kinda' sucks.

 

The Bills have never won a SB of course but they haven't even employed a HC who would go on to win a SB elsewhere as a HC.

 

That said McDermott is so far more organized than Phillips it's not funny.   With the pandemic limiting workouts the Bills are having more injury issues this year but prior to that he had really turned the strength and conditioning department into a huge advantage.   Wade Phillips was totally slack on this and his teams were constantly nagged by soft tissue injuries.

 

 

Lotta love for Knox around here, which I get. But his teams consistently choked in big games, came up flat when it mattered, lost weirdly to bad teams, and fell apart after the strike. To top it off, he bolted after 1982 and did nothing but talk smack about the team thereafter. 

 

 

[PUNT750]

7 hours ago, Greg S said:

I am surprised their is no love for Kay Stephenson and Hank Bullough.

That was an amazing run of lousy coaching!

[PUNT750]

7 hours ago, Greg S said:

 

I always wonder if the Bills had gotten homefield in 1980 then they probably go to the Super Bowl vs the Eagles. They had two bad losses to the Colts that year which cost them homefield advantage. Then that heartbreaking playoff loss to the Chargers in SD was a tough way to end the season.

That loss to the Chargers with Joe Ferguson playing on one leg is one of my worst memories. 

[vincec]

When I read things like this I always think of something that Merlin Olsen once said: that it's a lot easier for a team to go from being bad to being good than it is to go from being good to being a champion. McDermott has done well to get the team back to respectability, but taking the next step will be even harder and we should probably wait to see if he can do it before we anoint him the best ever. As was previous posted, Lou Saban won 2 AFL championships and even Marv won 4 AFC titles.

Edited October 29, 2020 by vincec

[teef]

15 hours ago, BUFFALOKIE said:

 

Uhhhm, you're some smart guy, right? Exciting, does not mean enjoyable. I get excited EVERY. SINGLE. GAME. Happy/Sad is the usual outcome, but excitement (for me) is never questioned. Other than that, I must agree with every other point you have made in this thread.

for me exciting does mean enjoyable.  do you get excited to have a prostate exam?  of course not, because it's not enjoyable.  

[spartacus]

On 10/27/2020 at 10:43 PM, 97bills said:

Man I’m glad someone said that about marv. I always thought the same thing but was scared to get roasted on here if you say anything about kelly or any of the 90’ bills. But my thing on marv was we should of never lost that super bowl against the Gmen. If marv would of sucked it up and just ran Thurman we would of won that game. 

Except Marchibroda,  Marv haired crap for coordinators 

mega demerits for keeping Walt Corey around to suppress the impact of Bruce Smith

read and react - my ass

[BUFFALOKIE]

6 hours ago, teef said:

for me exciting does mean enjoyable.  do you get excited to have a prostate exam?  of course not, because it's not enjoyable.  

 

My point was, do you wait until the outcome of the game is known before deciding to be excited or not? A well played game that comes down to the last play is exciting, win or lose. 

[JohnNord]

This take is maybe a bit premature but it’s no inconceivable.  Compared to other Bills coaches McDermott has been extremely successful and has done more less

[Murdox]

On 10/27/2020 at 9:56 PM, LB48 said:

Sean took over a team that hadn't won anything in 17 years.  January 2000 was our last play-off appearance!  We all lived through it and it was UGLY.  Many players and coaches couldn't make the Bills a winner despite tremendous fan support.

 

Now I see posts about "winning signature games" or if we lose to the Patriots it's a disaster.  Crazy and stupid!  It's the NFL in 2020 and most teams have a very good QB and can win against any opponent.

 

IMO Chuck Knox was the best coach in Bills history.  He took a losing franchise to respectability and back-to-back play-off seasons.  He assembled rookies and veterans to build a strong team.  IF he got his indoor practice facility, an aggressive GM and a upgraded contract he might have stayed around. 

 

Marv Levy was an ORGANIZER!  Not a great head coach.  He had the best team in the NFL talent wise.  He refused to make 'adjustments' during a game and felt the best way to win was to let the players do it.  Four Super Bowl losses should fall on him.  No game planning and no adjustments. Kelly could only do so much but didn't coach the defense and a lot of his success was due to ad-lib plays and Thurman Thomas.

 

I respect Sean and the 'process'.  It's working and Buffalo has a good, NFL competitive on the field each week.   GO BILLS!

 

 

 

I disagree with you to some extent about Marv.  The only one of the four Superbowls where I thought the Bills had the more talented team was against the Giants.  The Redskins team the following year, and the two Dallas teams were better teams on paper.  Most experts have agreed with that over the years.  The NFC was just a stronger conference for many years during that time period.

8 hours ago, spartacus said:

Except Marchibroda,  Marv haired crap for coordinators 

mega demerits for keeping Walt Corey around to suppress the impact of Bruce Smith

read and react - my ass

 

I have no problem with Wade Phillips as a DC.

[BADOLBILZ]

3 minutes ago, Murdox said:

 

I disagree with you to some extent about Marv.  The only one of the four Superbowls where I thought the Bills had the more talented team was against the Giants.  The Redskins team the following year, and the two Dallas teams were better teams on paper.  Most experts have agreed with that over the years.  The NFC was just a stronger conference for many years during that time period.

 

 

I think the Bills had the more talented team in the first 3 Super Bowls.   The Washington team in particular was a lot of journeyman and players past their prime.    The Cowboys team in XXVII was young and should have been vulnerable to a seasoned and primed Bills team that had yet to be picked on in free agency.

 

The Bills by far had the lesser coaching staffs in all 4 SB's though.

 

The other staffs had to orchestrate the season so that their team peaked for the playoffs and they had teams of comparable skill to go against in the NFC playoffs.........so those staffs had battle hardened teams going into the SB.    Levy just had to roll the ball out there against the feeble AFC.........and even then they had some too-tense moments in the playoffs.

[Matt_In_NH]

Jauron was the best.   He just needed some more time 

[LB48]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I think the Bills had the more talented team in the first 3 Super Bowls.   The Washington team in particular was a lot of journeyman and players past their prime.    The Cowboys team in XXVII was young and should have been vulnerable to a seasoned and primed Bills team that had yet to be picked on in free agency.

 

The Bills by far had the lesser coaching staffs in all 4 SB's though.

 

The other staffs had to orchestrate the season so that their team peaked for the playoffs and they had teams of comparable skill to go against in the NFC playoffs.........so those staffs had battle hardened teams going into the SB.    Levy just had to roll the ball out there against the feeble AFC.........and even then they had some too-tense moments in the playoffs.

I didn't like calling Marv an "organizer" rather than a great HC.  But - after watching so many years of Bills football that's what I think.  Getting embarrassed in 3 SB's

was a coaching problem.

[dave mcbride]

15 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I think the Bills had the more talented team in the first 3 Super Bowls.   The Washington team in particular was a lot of journeyman and players past their prime.    The Cowboys team in XXVII was young and should have been vulnerable to a seasoned and primed Bills team that had yet to be picked on in free agency.

 

The Bills by far had the lesser coaching staffs in all 4 SB's though.

 

The other staffs had to orchestrate the season so that their team peaked for the playoffs and they had teams of comparable skill to go against in the NFC playoffs.........so those staffs had battle hardened teams going into the SB.    Levy just had to roll the ball out there against the feeble AFC.........and even then they had some too-tense moments in the playoffs.

Disagree *STRONGLY* about the Redskins. Their offensive line that season was one of the best in league history (and I think the last healthy season for Lachey, who was hands down the best LT in the league then—and better than Wolford). Plus Wilbur Marshall was still in his prime (29 years old) and a true game-changing player. He had 5 ints as a linebacker, which as you know is phenomenal. It was his best season ever, and he had a lot of good ones.  Overall, they had GREAT vets who were decidedly not past their prime yet. Christ, They had Lachey, Joe Jacoby, Jeff Bostic, Mark Schlereth, and Raleigh Mackenzie on their line, and none got injured that season. All of those linemen were better-than-average to great players. More importantly, they destroyed virtually all of their opponents that season and finished  first in offense and second in defense. They were quite literally one of the most dominant teams of the past 30 years. Their average regular season game score was 30-14!!!  Bear in mind that they lost the last game of the season because they played backups for half the game. They were basically 14-1, only losing 24-21 to an up-and-coming Dallas team that won its last five games.
 

The three scores in their playoff games were 24-7, 41-10, and 37-24.

 

I recommend revisiting that team. I strongly believe it was one of the best in league history.

 

As for Dallas in 1992, I don’t know where to begin. They played in the big-boy conference and finished first in defense and second in offense. They were *twice* as talented as the Bills that year, who were overmatched by speed at almost every position. And it’s not like jimmy and wannstedt were any fancier than marv. They just rolled out talent onto the field, kept it simple and let talent win out. 

Edited October 30, 2020 by dave mcbride

[BADOLBILZ]

2 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Disagree *STRONGLY* about the Redskins. Their offensive line that season was one of the best in league history (and I think the last healthy season for Lachey, who was hands down the best LT in the league then—and better than Wolford). Plus Wilbur Marshall was still in his prime (29 years old) and a true game-changing player. He had 5 ints as a linebacker, which as you know is phenomenal. It was his best season ever, and he had a lot of good ones.  Overall, they had GREAT vets who were decidedly not past their prime yet. Christ, They had Lachey, Joe Jacoby, Jeff Bostic, Mark Schlereth, and Raleigh Mackenzie on their line, and none got injured that season. All of those linemen were better-than-average to great players. More importantly, they destroyed virtually all of their opponents that season and finished  first in offense and second in defense. They were quite literally one of the most dominant teams of the past 30 years. Their average regular season game score was 30-14!!!  Bear in mind that they lost the last game of the season because they played backups for half the game. They were basically 14-1, only losing 24-21 to an up-and-coming Dallas team that won its last five games.
 

The three scores in their playoff games were 24-7, 41-10, and 37-24.

 

I recommend revisiting that team. I strongly believe it was one of the best in league history.

 

As for Dallas in 1992, I don’t know where to begin. They played in the big-boy conference and finished first in defense and second in offense. They were *twice* as talented as the Bills that year, who were overmatched by speed at almost every position. And it’s not like jimmy and wannstedt were any fancier than marv. They just rolled out talent onto the field, kept it simple and let talent win out. 

 

 

Joe Gibbs was an incredible coach.

 

 He won SB's with 3 different QB's.

 

IMO he was the best head coach of that 1980-2000 era.

 

They were clearly the better team than the Bills.......but not the more talented one.

 

The Bills starting lineup featured 5 Hall of Famers........the skins had 2.

 

And many other matchups all over the field where you would take the Bills players career over that of their counterpart on the Skins.

 

They had a talented OL but for chrissake so did the Bills. 

 

Gibbs just coaxed the best out of that roster.........he got great football out of guys like Mark Rypien and Kurt Gouveia.........who on that day they played better than any of the Bills HOF'ers.........but they weren't the more talented players. 

 

I recommend revisiting those rosters.

[dave mcbride]

6 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Joe Gibbs was an incredible coach.

 

 He won SB's with 3 different QB's.

 

IMO he was the best head coach of that 1980-2000 era.

 

They were clearly the better team than the Bills.......but not the more talented one.

 

The Bills starting lineup featured 5 Hall of Famers........the skins had 2.

 

And many other matchups all over the field where you would take the Bills players career over that of their counterpart on the Skins.

 

They had a talented OL but for chrissake so did the Bills. 

 

Gibbs just coaxed the best out of that roster.........he got great football out of guys like Mark Rypien and Kurt Gouveia.........who on that day they played better than any of the Bills HOF'ers.........but they weren't the more talented players. 

 

I recommend revisiting those rosters.

Badol, if you think the Bills roster, which feasted on weaker competition, was better than the Skins roster, I don’t know what to say. They were far, far, far more dominant than the Bills that year, and at that point in time it was an o-line/d-line matchup league. The Bills’ best defensive player (and the only great one) was hurt all season (knee) and a shell of himself in the postseason. Bennett was quite good, but the rest were poor to middling except for Conlan and Talley (who was not as good as fans remember). They were rolling out a lot of replaceable players on that D (especially on d-line), and the one guy who covered it all up—Bruce—was a non-factor that year because of the knee.

 

Also, you didn’t address my rejoinder to your alarmingly specious claim about the 92 Cowboys. And you, the biggest ‘Canes fan I know!

 

 

Edited October 30, 2020 by dave mcbride

[BADOLBILZ]

24 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Badol, if you think the Bills roster, which feasted on weaker competition, was better than the Skins roster, I don’t know what to say. They were far, far, far more dominant than the Bills that year, and at that point in time it was an o-line/d-line matchup league. The Bills’ best defensive player (and the only great one) was hurt all season (knee) and a shell of himself in the postseason. Bennett was quite good, but the rest were poor to middling except for Conlan and Talley (who was not as good as fans remember). They were rolling out a lot of replaceable players on that D (especially on d-line), and the one guy who covered it all up—Bruce—was a non-factor that year because of the knee.

 

Also, you didn’t address my rejoinder to your alarmingly specious claim about the 92 Cowboys. And you, the biggest ‘Canes fan I know!

 

 

 

The Skins were the best team the Bills played in those SB's........they would have kicked the ***** out of both of those Cowboys teams.

 

But they weren't even more talented than the Bills.............the Skins were just that much better coached, prepared and focused.

 

They were a team on a mission..........the Bills were a bunch of talented football players with a bunch of different agendas loosely assembled around a soft HC and poor coaching staff.

 

As I said the two best performers in that SB were journeyman players...........Mark Rypien and Kurt Gouveia.

 

As for the Cowboys just being too fast for the Bills..........well the Bills were faster than the Skins on both sides of the ball and special teams........didn't matter because they executed and the Bills did not.

 

Saying the Cowboys were "twice as talented" as the Bills roster is ridiculous.

 

Again.......start with the Bills fielding 5 HOF'ers to the Cowboys 4.............then look at the other players.........those two rosters were closely matched and in many cases the Bills players had longer and much more productive careers than their Cowboys counterparts.

 

It's easy to forget how long guys like Phil Hansen and Henry Jones and Marcus Patton started and played really well in the NFL.   I really don't get your contention that the Bills were no comparison to the talent of the Redskins and Cowboys in those two SB's.    

 

They flat out choked and played far below their talent level in those games.   

 

Hell, they were 12-0 against the NFC in the regular season during that SB run.........they weren't perfect and Polian deserves scorn for not adding a big NT or dumping Norwood sooner............but being a loosely run operation is why they lost........their lack of discipline and mental toughness came home to roost in the SB.

 

 

[LB48]

7 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Joe Gibbs was an incredible coach.

 

 He won SB's with 3 different QB's.

 

IMO he was the best head coach of that 1980-2000 era.

 

They were clearly the better team than the Bills.......but not the more talented one.

 

The Bills starting lineup featured 5 Hall of Famers........the skins had 2.

 

And many other matchups all over the field where you would take the Bills players career over that of their counterpart on the Skins.

 

They had a talented OL but for chrissake so did the Bills. 

 

Gibbs just coaxed the best out of that roster.........he got great football out of guys like Mark Rypien and Kurt Gouveia.........who on that day they played better than any of the Bills HOF'ers.........but they weren't the more talented players. 

 

I recommend revisiting those rosters.

IF Marv and his staff had done ANYTHING innovative in the Super Bowls we might have won a few of them.  No new game planning and a defense that was over-rated.

[Big Turk]

On 10/27/2020 at 10:43 PM, 97bills said:

Man I’m glad someone said that about marv. I always thought the same thing but was scared to get roasted on here if you say anything about kelly or any of the 90’ bills. But my thing on marv was we should of never lost that super bowl against the Gmen. If marv would of sucked it up and just ran Thurman we would of won that game. 

 

The Bills barely had the ball so they kind of had this false sense of "we gotta make something happen". I mean Thurman was the MVP in that game...the only reason he didn't get it is because the writers legit didn't know you could vote for a losing player.

[97bills]

1 minute ago, matter2003 said:

 

The Bills barely had the ball so they kind of had this false sense of "we gotta make something happen". I mean Thurman was the MVP in that game...the only reason he didn't get it is because the writers legit didn't know you could vote for a losing player.

Who would want a mvp after losing a super bowl. And we clearly got out coach in that game with a back up QB. Maybe Allen can get us one ol jimbo just two many picks

[BADOLBILZ]

1 minute ago, LB48 said:

IF Marv and his staff had done ANYTHING innovative in the Super Bowls we might have won a few of them.  No new game planning and a defense that was over-rated.

 

 

Hell if Marv just had enough pull to keep them out of the bars all week they might have won a couple of them.

 

They loved Marv because he let the superstars the asylum..........off the field.........in training camp.........in return they gave him the illusion of control so that they didn't end up with a disciplinarian.

 

The upside was that Club Marv was an atmosphere where the players weren't getting beaten up and that helped them get to 4 straight Super Bowls.

 

As fans we would rather that they would have just went 2-0 or something like that...........but so many of those Bills had very long careers and therefore made a lot more money than they would have if they would have been burnt out by Parcells/Gibbs/Jimmy..........so though they got no rings......I think from a player perspective Marv was berry-berry guuud to them.  

 

[spartacus]

On 10/29/2020 at 6:28 PM, Murdox said:

 

I disagree with you to some extent about Marv.  The only one of the four Superbowls where I thought the Bills had the more talented team was against the Giants.  The Redskins team the following year, and the two Dallas teams were better teams on paper.  Most experts have agreed with that over the years.  The NFC was just a stronger conference for many years during that time period.

 

I have no problem with Wade Phillips as a DC.

too bad he didn't hire him during the super bowl run

[Big Turk]

14 minutes ago, 97bills said:

Who would want a mvp after losing a super bowl. And we clearly got out coach in that game with a back up QB. Maybe Allen can get us one ol jimbo just two many picks

 

Anyone who watched that game knew he was the best player on the field.

[97bills]

12 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

 

Anyone who watched that game knew he was the best player on the field.

I agree 💯 

[GreggTX]

1. Lou Saban (back to back 1st place finishes)

2. Marv Levy (4 consecutive 2nd place finishes)

.

.

.

Last - Harvey Johnson (2-26)