Speculative article on friction between McDermott and Staff?

[Doc]

I've figured it out.  We know Bass was off kicking to the side and kicked it deep.  That tells me he was told to kick deep (not sure by whom), and that's all he needed to know/do.  But the call was then changed to a squib, made by McD obviously, and Farwell told the rest of the STs but not Bass.  Farwell resigns instead of getting fired.

 

As for the defensive calls...I've got nothing. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

12 minutes ago, Doc said:

I've figured it out.  We know Bass was off kicking to the side and kicked it deep.  That tells me he was told to kick deep and that's all he needed to know/do.  But the call was then changed to a squib, made by McD obviously, and Farwell told the rest of the STs but not Bass.  Farwell resigns instead of getting fired.

 

Just a little note that folks have made upthread, the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but a squib and a pooch kick are in fact different.

 

https://coachingkidz.com/what-is-a-squib-kick-in-football/

https://www.marca.com/en/nfl/2022/01/26/61f1b63d22601d942e8b4604.html

 

11 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

I believe Dunne. The way to build what he’s trying to build isn’t by creating sources and/or lying. And the story Dunne tells jives with what we saw happen…incompetence.

 

Just to be clear, I'm neither accusing Dunne of "creating sources" or of "lying".

 

But we don't know who his sources are, whether they are people who have direct personal knowledge of the situation or are recounting hearsay, or even whether they are people who have a personal interest in shifting the narrative.

 

A person can have actual sources and be correctly conveying what they were told by those sources, but their story is only as good as their sources.  This is, essentially, the "eyewitness" problem in criminal trials.

 

However, the fact that you converted what was said into an accusation of "creating sources" and "lying" speaks to the thinking process behind your beliefs, thus whether those beliefs should be considered credible.

[billsfan1959]

6 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

So let me get this straight. 

 

You want to believe an anonymously sourced piece by an independent football writer who is no longer bound by organizational standards like "I must have two independent sources with direct personal knowledge of the situation".

 

Therefore, because of this situation, you want to believe that McDermott, who by all other sources has been a man of deep integrity and character who says 'it was my decision' when in fact, it was his decision, actually called for a deep kick and lied.

 

The "Occum's Razor" call here is that McDermott is a straight shooter who would own a decision he actually made.  If he called for a deep kick, he would own it.  McDermott has made other controversial calls and has owned every one.  It's not actually a controversial call, Championship Winning coaches like Sean Payton are on the record as pointing to a deep kick as the correct call and explaining why he thinks so. 

 

The other approach still paints the ST coach as having incompetent communications (since the entire ST unit obviously still expected a squib, so in this scenario the HC call for a deep kick wasn't communicated to 10 guys on the unit), AND paints McDermott as a lying weasel, so obviously that must be the correct scenario.

 

 

I certainly understand the emotional reaction after the game, as every one of us had experienced it to one degree or another. However, it feels that there are a small number of posters who, not only have shown little ability to move past it, but seem to have actually elevated their anger at McDermott to a whole new level. To the point they are willing to ignore five years of behavior that would lead even the casual observer to conclude McDermott is a man of, as you say, deep integrity and character, in order to believe anything that fuels that anger...

[Ethan in Cleveland]

8 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

We overcame the Cardinals thing and we will overcome this

Hope so. Seattle has not recovered from Wilson throwing an INT at the goal line.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

3 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I certainly understand the emotional reaction after the game, as every one of us had experienced it to one degree or another. However, it feels that there are a small number of posters who, not only have shown little ability to move past it, but seem to have actually elevated their anger at McDermott to a whole new level. To the point they are willing to ignore five years of behavior that would lead even the casual observer to conclude McDermott is a man of, as you say, deep integrity and character, in order to believe anything that fuels that anger...

You don't know McDermott any more than me or anyone else. You have no idea about his integrity or character.  Lots of coaches preach integrity and then practice differently.  

What we know is the coaching staff cost the city of Buffalo a championship and McDermott labeled it as execution which is code for the players didn't perform. The players don't decide how to kick the ball and they don't decide to rush 4. At best Levi may have freelanced lining up wide and deep, but based on where the safeties were lined up, McDermott was defending against a TD not a FG. He called timeouts twice and they still choked.

 

[Punching Bag]

34 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

The other approach still paints the ST coach as having incompetent communications (since the entire ST unit obviously still expected a kickoff return, so in this scenario the HC call for a deep kick wasn't communicated to 10 guys on the unit), AND paints McDermott as a lying weasel, so obviously that must be the correct scenario.

Dunne (Smart Ass) is more likely the lying weasel.   Question is which posters supporting him fit other characters Stupid, Greasy, Psycho and Wheezy best?

 

 

Why is Dunne trying to be the Sulking Sullivan replacement?

[finn]

9 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

100% correct. It's as if some posters here haven't observed a single thing about McDermott over the last 5 years that defines his character. Or, they just have no ability whatsoever to accurately interpret the behavior of others. 

 

Yeah, but a botch of this magnitude can do a lot of damage, even to a coach who has done things right for five years. His "execution" comment throws the players under the bus, when it's obvious they did what he and Frazier asked them to do. The two of them blew it, not the players, and he really screwed up by exculpating himself at their expense.

 

And, no, his "...and that's on me" bromide does not undo the damage. I wouldn't be surprised if this is festering to a degree among the players. I suspect it will clear up, but McDermott may have used up a lot of goodwill. He can't blow it again, or blow it and blame the players.

[billsfan1959]

35 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

You don't know McDermott any more than me or anyone else. You have no idea about his integrity or character.  Lots of coaches preach integrity and then practice differently.  

What we know is the coaching staff cost the city of Buffalo a championship and McDermott labeled it as execution which is code for the players didn't perform. The players don't decide how to kick the ball and they don't decide to rush 4. At best Levi may have freelanced lining up wide and deep, but based on where the safeties were lined up, McDermott was defending against a TD not a FG. He called timeouts twice and they still choked.

 

 

If you don't have a pretty good idea of the type of man McDermott is after the last five years, then that says says volumes about you...

 

18 minutes ago, finn said:

Yeah, but a botch of this magnitude can do a lot of damage, even to a coach who has done things right for five years. His "execution" comment throws the players under the bus, when it's obvious they did what he and Frazier asked them to do. The two of them blew it, not the players, and he really screwed up by exculpating himself at their expense.

 

And, no, his "...and that's on me" bromide does not undo the damage. I wouldn't be surprised if this is festering to a degree among the players. I suspect it will clear up, but McDermott may have used up a lot of goodwill. He can't blow it again, or blow it and blame the players.

 

How do you go about conjuring this much drama up in your head?

[Ethan in Cleveland]

5 hours ago, billsfan714 said:

The "execution" line is just a cop out.   It was strategy and communication which both fall under coaching.   Plain and simple.   The three plays occurred with a TV timeout and Bills timeouts.  Plenty of time to get things right.   They were the 3 plays you wouldn't want to run in the  situation.  KO into the end zone followed by deep outside technique defense.   The Bills never got the ball back to another great offense.   Sean crapped the bed after a heroic effort by Josh and the offense.  The offense was given a task, score a TD within just over a minute of time.  Check done, and the KO team and D was given the task of preventing a FG in 13 seconds and they couldn't get it done.   Its squarely on our head coach with a defensive coordinator background.

 

'

Perfect post

[BarleyNY]

10 minutes ago, finn said:

Yeah, but a botch of this magnitude can do a lot of damage, even to a coach who has done things right for five years. His "execution" comment throws the players under the bus, when it's obvious they did what he and Frazier asked them to do. The two of them blew it, not the players, and he really screwed up by exculpating himself at their expense.

 

And, no, his "...and that's on me" bromide does not undo the damage. I wouldn't be surprised if this is festering to a degree among the players. I suspect it will clear up, but McDermott may have used up a lot of goodwill. He can't blow it again, or blow it and blame the players.

Gotta be honest, this is where I am.  If things go South for the Bills, this is what everyone will point to as the place it all went wrong.  It’s by no means a foregone conclusion that’s how it will go, but I agree that a lot of goodwill is used up.  That matters if, for instance, Dorsey’s offense gets off to a slow start or the defense takes a step back.  The former is a possibility, but the latter is a near certainty IMO simply because we are going to play a tougher schedule with better opposing QBs.  I hope that the ship gets righted and we get over the hump.  Expectations are so high for this team that it is difficult to live up to them, especially in a loaded AFC.  🤞

[Ethan in Cleveland]

2 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

If you don't have a pretty good idea of the type of man McDermott is after the last five years, then that says says volumes about you...

 

Please. You think what we are allowed to see is the reality. Lol. Google Jim Tressel who preached and even wrote about integrity and then did the exact opposite.  

All that said even if he is a man of high integrity and there is nothing truly publicly known to doubt that, he still choked in the moment. I could really care less about his character flaws or not, just don't blow our chance at a SB with the best QB talent in the NFL.

25 minutes ago, finn said:

Yeah, but a botch of this magnitude can do a lot of damage, even to a coach who has done things right for five years. His "execution" comment throws the players under the bus, when it's obvious they did what he and Frazier asked them to do. The two of them blew it, not the players, and he really screwed up by exculpating himself at their expense.

 

And, no, his "...and that's on me" bromide does not undo the damage. I wouldn't be surprised if this is festering to a degree among the players. I suspect it will clear up, but McDermott may have used up a lot of goodwill. He can't blow it again, or blow it and blame the players.

Another perfect post. Well stated.

[billsfan1959]

Just now, Ethan in Portland said:

Please. You think what we are allowed to see is the reality. Lol. Google Jim Tressel who preached and even wrote about integrity and then did the exact opposite.  

All that said even if he is a man of high integrity and there is nothing truly publicly known to doubt that, he still choked in the moment. I could really care less about his character flaws or not, just don't blow our chance at a SB with the best QB talent in the NFL.

 

I stand by what I said. If you don't have a really good idea who McDermott is by now, that's on you.

 

I believe your stances are driven by emotion rather than reason and every post you write only reinforces that belief.

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

Just a little note that folks have made upthread, the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but a squib and a pooch kick are in fact different.

 

https://coachingkidz.com/what-is-a-squib-kick-in-football/

https://www.marca.com/en/nfl/2022/01/26/61f1b63d22601d942e8b4604.html

 

Yup, know the difference and meant squib.  A "pooch" kick, at least as far as the article you linked described (a high kick to the 20-25 yard line and designed to be taken by an up-man to prevent/limit a return) doesn't make sense because you get to about the same yard-line as a TB and the ball can still be fair caught with no time being taken off, but also has a chance to be returned.  The squib OTOH bounces around preventing a returner from getting a good bead on it and theoretically ends up closer to the endzone compelling the returner to pick it up and use up clock.  The only other kick that would have been appropriate would be a high kick to close to the endzone.  But again, that allows for a return set-up.

[NoSaint]

6 hours ago, mannc said:

A manager “accepting responsibility” for a major mistake is a flexible, almost meaningless concept in our modern society. In Japan, it used to mean hurling yourself off the roof of the nearest skyscraper (and before that, ritually eviscerating yourself); in other societies, it means—or meant—at a minimum, resigning your position.  Nowadays, it just means uttering the words “I accept responsibility”, and little else, no real consequences.  

McDermott “accepts responsibility” for those 13 seconds only in this latter, modern sense. Maybe that’s why people are not satisfied with his stance on this whole fiasco…

if he said “I accept responsibility for… whatever caused the issue” it would be much stronger than “I accept responsibility for losing because I’m the head of the team and it’s all my responsibility”

[Buddy Hix]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Just a little note that folks have made upthread, the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but a squib and a pooch kick are in fact different.

 

https://coachingkidz.com/what-is-a-squib-kick-in-football/

https://www.marca.com/en/nfl/2022/01/26/61f1b63d22601d942e8b4604.html

 

 

Just to be clear, I'm neither accusing Dunne of "creating sources" or of "lying".

 

But we don't know who his sources are, whether they are people who have direct personal knowledge of the situation or are recounting hearsay, or even whether they are people who have a personal interest in shifting the narrative.

 

A person can have actual sources and be correctly conveying what they were told by those sources, but their story is only as good as their sources.  This is, essentially, the "eyewitness" problem in criminal trials.

 

However, the fact that you converted what was said into an accusation of "creating sources" and "lying" speaks to the thinking process behind your beliefs, thus whether those beliefs should be considered credible.

LMAO…you said to keep in mind that Dunne is trying to sell a product and then said that he isn’t being held to the journalistic standard of two independent sources. Dunne has multiple independent sources.

Have you read the article?

[billsfan1959]

50 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

LMAO…you said to keep in mind that Dunne is trying to sell a product and then said that he isn’t being held to the journalistic standard of two independent sources. Dunne has multiple independent sources.

Have you read the article?

 

I did and, from beginning to end, the language in the article was dripping with Dunne's dislike for Sean McDermott. When you don't even attempt to hide your disdain for the person you are writing about, you better have something substantial to overcome the credibility issue you create for yourself from the start. Dunne didn't. He sounded like an entitled little brat who didn't get what he wanted and the entire article felt like a tantrum.

 

If articles that scream, "lack of intellectual integrity" are the kind of thing you need to justify your own dislike for MCDermott, be my guest. 

 

Edited March 6, 2022 by billsfan1959

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

Yup, know the difference and meant squib.  A "pooch" kick, at least as far as the article you linked described (a high kick to the 20-25 yard line and designed to be taken by an up-man to prevent/limit a return) doesn't make sense because you get to about the same yard-line as a TB and the ball can still be fair caught with no time being taken off, but also has a chance to be returned.  The squib OTOH bounces around preventing a returner from getting a good bead on it and theoretically ends up closer to the endzone compelling the returner to pick it up and use up clock.  The only other kick that would have been appropriate would be a high kick to close to the endzone.  But again, that allows for a return set-up.

That's pry what was called.  Their returner is not going to fair catch it at the five yard line or take the chance of it bouncing through the end zone. We have one of the best special teams coverage units in the NFL and have used that kick effectively throughout the season.  Bass is excellent at executing them.  The problem with the squib kick is it can take a funny bounce, it can hit one of their blockers at like the 40 where they can just fall on it, and the lack of hang time on the ball gives our coverage unit less time to get down the field increasing the chances of a long kick return.  

[Big Blitz]

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

So let me get this straight. 

 

You want to believe an anonymously sourced piece by an independent football writer who is no longer bound by organizational standards like "I must have two independent sources with direct personal knowledge of the situation".

 

Therefore, because of this situation, you want to believe that McDermott, who by all other sources has been a man of deep integrity and character who says 'it was my decision' when in fact, it was his decision, actually called for a deep kick and lied.

 

The "Occum's Razor" call here is that McDermott is a straight shooter who would own a decision he actually made.  If he called for a deep kick, he would own it.  McDermott has made other controversial calls and has owned every one.  It's not actually a controversial call, Championship Winning coaches like Sean Payton are on the record as pointing to a deep kick as the correct call and explaining why he thinks so. 

 

The other approach still paints the ST coach as having incompetent communications (since the entire ST unit obviously still expected a kickoff return, so in this scenario the HC call for a deep kick wasn't communicated to 10 guys on the unit), AND paints McDermott as a lying weasel, so obviously that must be the correct scenario.

 

 

 

 

 

 

He did not say after the game what he said last week at the start of the combine.  Which was much closer to owning it tho still not completely.  

 

At the combine he said "it's execution and that includes communication and ultimately that starts with me."  End.

 

After the game he said something very close to "it was execution.  We just didn't get the job done.  There are situations we prepare for and we just didn't execute."

 

 

It's not even important anymore what the players said as the game ended.  What matters is what they heard from their HC after the game and if it was acceptable to them because they know what happened.  But apparently after the game and since we've decided to keep what actually happened under the most bizarre code of silence I've ever seen about a collapse that absolutely warrants the fans but especially the players hearing the coach tell the truth.    

 

His answer at the combine revealed there was more to what happened on the squibb or no squibb call.  So I don't need the most upstanding reporter to accurately and without bias investigate this.

 

And for the 100th time.  I'm the biggest McD supporter there has been.  And agree with everything you said about his integrity, etc.  But they just lost in historic fashion they knew then cost them a SB and I don't know what his mindset was.  It wasn't a week 3 loss where it's easy to take ownership.  This doesn't make him lesser of a leader btw.  Maybe he just didn't feel he deserved the blame for those awful D calls that were just as equal at costing us the game. 

Edited March 6, 2022 by Big Blitz

[Punching Bag]

Players do not just execute.  All of the on-field and coaching booth staff execute as well.

People complaining want him to identify fault and clearly he will not do that.

Reminds me on arguments on COVID.

[Doc]

17 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

That's pry what was called.  Their returner is not going to fair catch it at the five yard line or take the chance of it bouncing through the end zone. We have one of the best special teams coverage units in the NFL and have used that kick effectively throughout the season.  Bass is excellent at executing them.  The problem with the squib kick is it can take a funny bounce, it can hit one of their blockers at like the 40 where they can just fall on it, and the lack of hang time on the ball gives our coverage unit less time to get down the field increasing the chances of a long kick return.  

 

It could very well have been...but after Bass was initially told to kick a TB and not relayed to him.