Who is to blame for our lack of Lombardis?

[Royale with Cheese]

1 minute ago, IronMaidenBills said:

I refuse to believe this. Mistakes are preventable with either better coaching or better talent acquisition. Fumbling isn’t luck. Interceptions isn’t luck. Ball security is a skill, making good throws consistently is a skill. Optimizing football strategy is a skill. In game adaptation is a skill. Clock management is a skill. 

What a load of crap.

 

Just because you refuse to believe this doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

 

Luck happens in everything in life, sports and non-sports related.

 

 

 

[Thurman#1]

9 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

I refuse to believe this. Mistakes are preventable with either better coaching or better talent acquisition. Fumbling isn’t luck. Interceptions isn’t luck. Ball security is a skill, making good throws consistently is a skill. Optimizing football strategy is a skill. In game adaptation is a skill. Clock management is a skill. 

 

 

You've put it perfectly.

 

You refuse to believe this. Precisely! That is indeed your problem, that you see something that makes sense and refuse to believe it.

 

After all, finding a scapegoat feels so very much better than listening to reason. No scapegoat means no pitchfork, and that's the fun part for many.

[MJS]

I don't know why "blame" needs to be a part of the conversation.

 

There is this team called the Buffalo Bills that I root for to win. Sometimes they do well, sometimes they don't. Recently they have been doing very well and seem to be on the doorstep of winning a championship if they can tweak a few things and add a bit more talent, and play better in certain situations in the playoffs.

 

I hope they can get there. I don't find the need to point blame at anyone.

[billsfan1959]

17 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Where did I say fire them? I simply want to know who is to blame more at this moment. Is it a lack of talent or coaching. It’s simple because that’s what determines success in sports is all about. 

 

The problem with threads like this and posters like you is that you don't actually want honest dialogue. You tell people you want to to take the subjectivity out of an evaluation that is primarily, or at least to a large degree, subjective; and demand pure objectivity when you are one of the least objective posters here.

 

In the end, you seem to want neither subjective nor objective dialogue, but, instead, seem to be primarily interested in emotional rants, across posts and threads, where you feel compelled to let everyone know how angry you are that this team didn't give you what you wanted, and who you think should be blamed - and, ultimately - who should pay for how you feel.

 

And when a poster dares to disagree with you, you become aggressive and question that posters' passion for this team, desire to win, or just the poster's level of "fandom" in general."

 

Edited March 12, 2022 by billsfan1959

[HOUSE]

Owner Collusion

 

 

[Milanos Milano]

3 minutes ago, SWATeam said:

LOL, ok.  So the 2007 Giants had better coaching or talent than the 2007 Pats*?  Which is it?

It depends how we decide on determining the gauge of roster quality. Obviously QB is the most important position in football, but it’s still a team sport. You could argue the Giants coaching is what made the difference that game because the pats had a good overall roster. 

[Royale with Cheese]

6 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

They were better in that moment of time. Keeping talent focused and consistent is a skill. The best find ways to stay consistent in their performances. It’s not always because of a lack of talent, but failure to recognize what is the best way to strategize against varying opponents. The best chess players in the world can win with different approaches at any given time. 

If one of the best chess players doesn’t win the championship with all those winnable approaches…that means all those approaches are failures.  This is your argument.

[Ga boy]

25 minutes ago, Gugny said:

Many factors, but my knee-jerk response to this is that Beane has not done well addressing the lines on both sides of the ball.

 

I think Beane has done a fantastic job overall, and I wouldn't want anyone else at GM.  But the success this team has had has been because of one person:  Josh Allen.  Not many QBs would be as successful behind that crap line.  And the defense, while on paper and with deceiving statistics saying it's a "Top D," has been a failure.

 

Everyone wants to bang the 13-second drum, but the fact remains that giving up 36 points in regulation is not going to result in a W the vast majority of the time.

 

Last season was the easiest road to the Super Bowl the Bills will likely ever see.  Poor coaching is what kept the Bills from going to/winning the Super Bowl.

 

But still, I would be shocked if the Bills don't win at least one in the next 4-5 years.

Agree that OL and DL have not been SB caliber.  We’ll win SB when JA17 is not out best rusher.  Go Bills 🦬🦬🦬

[Royale with Cheese]

2 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

It depends how we decide on determining the gauge of roster quality. Obviously QB is the most important position in football, but it’s still a team sport. You could argue the Giants coaching is what made the difference that game because the pats had a good overall roster. 

Oh so now you’re being subjective which you are against.  Which one is it?

[Milanos Milano]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

If one of the best chess players doesn’t win the championship with all those winnable approaches…that means all those approaches are failures.  This is your argument.

Yes. Because somewhere along the lines mistakes happened against a superior challenger at that time. 

[Freddie's Dead]

This year, it was McChoke.  We had the team and the personnel, he blew it.  SBXXV - We had the better team/personnel.  Jim Kelly needed to give the ball to Thurman, but insisted on continuing to pass into a defense designed to stop that.  I lay the game on Kelly, and also Marvcus, for not getting Jimbo to do what needed to be done.  SBXXVI and SBXXVII, we were overmatched.  SBXXVIII, another game we should have won, but Thurman quitting after the fumble six doomed us.  I lay that one on Thurman.

[SWATeam]

3 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

It depends how we decide on determining the gauge of roster quality. Obviously QB is the most important position in football, but it’s still a team sport. You could argue the Giants coaching is what made the difference that game because the pats had a good overall roster. 

Yes, must have been the advantage in coaching that Coughlin had over Belichick that got them over the top... 

[billsfan1959]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

Oh so now you’re being subjective which you are against.  Which one is it?

 

It is whatever he needs at the moment. Intellectual honesty and consistency are not his strong suits...

[Milanos Milano]

4 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

Oh so now you’re being subjective which you are against.  Which one is it?

Statistical analysis isn’t subjective. Data is data. On paper the pats had more talent. I can’t say for certain because we haven’t discussed what is the best way in determining roster talent success. So if the pats had the better roster at that time, then that means the giants had better coaching to win the super bowl. 

3 minutes ago, SWATeam said:

Yes, must have been the advantage in coaching that Coughlin had over Belichick that got them over the top... 

That had to of been the case. The pats were obviously the more talented team on paper. I bet if we did a positional statistical quartile ranking of the teams talent, the giants would be below the pats that year in player performance metrics. 

Edited March 12, 2022 by IronMaidenBills

[Royale with Cheese]

Just now, IronMaidenBills said:

Yes. Because somewhere along the lines mistakes happened against a superior challenger at that time. 

Oh so it wasn’t the superior opponent who was the reason he won it….it was the inferior opponent making mistakes.

 

I see how your mind thinks now.  

3 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Statistical analysis isn’t subjective. Data is data. On paper the pats had more talent. I can’t say for certain because we haven’t discussed what is the best way in determining roster talent success. So if the pats had the better roster at that time, then that means the giants had better coaching to win the super bowl. 

Statistical analysis isn’t subjective?????

Okay, this is getting beyond dumb now.

Im out.

[Beerball]

1 hour ago, IronMaidenBills said:

So some say winning in the NFL is hard. Some say it takes luck. I say it all comes down to roster talent and coaching to get the most out of that roster talent (player execution). Where do you stand at the moment, who is to blame for not winning any Lombardis? 
 

A lot of posters here feel we have a top 5 roster. Which ultimately begs the question, how exactly should we qualify what is “top 5” , which metrics are we going to use. Should we use positional statistical quartiles for every team position and weight them based on positional importance? I’m serious, I would like to sit down and debate how exactly we should gauge this. 
 

Some posters here feel we aren’t winning Lombardis because of coaching strategy and maximizing player execution. Which coaching statistics should we use to gauge coaching performance? I want to try and be as less subjective as possible when trying to determine where fault is placed. 
 

I don’t believe in luck. I believe in talent and talent execution. Luck is a crutch people use to excuse away failure. 
 

How is it that some NFL teams can win Lombardis on less than top 5 roster talent, but somehow we supposedly can’t? 
 

Please discuss as honestly as you can. 

Player execution (I'm for it) & scheme/strategy are two, maybe three very different things. Lumping them together and then adding coaching to the mix a'int right.

[todd]

1 hour ago, IronMaidenBills said:

So some say winning in the NFL is hard. Some say it takes luck. I say it all comes down to roster talent and coaching to get the most out of that roster talent (player execution). Where do you stand at the moment, who is to blame for not winning any Lombardis? 
 

A lot of posters here feel we have a top 5 roster. Which ultimately begs the question, how exactly should we qualify what is “top 5” , which metrics are we going to use. Should we use positional statistical quartiles for every team position and weight them based on positional importance? I’m serious, I would like to sit down and debate how exactly we should gauge this. 
 

Some posters here feel we aren’t winning Lombardis because of coaching strategy and maximizing player execution. Which coaching statistics should we use to gauge coaching performance? I want to try and be as less subjective as possible when trying to determine where fault is placed. 
 

I don’t believe in luck. I believe in talent and talent execution. Luck is a crutch people use to excuse away failure. 
 

How is it that some NFL teams can win Lombardis on less than top 5 roster talent, but somehow we supposedly can’t? 
 

Please discuss as honestly as you can. 

in my opinion, it is because people on message boards who are on a crusade know way more than playoff coaches and GMs, and all would be solved it such posters were given control of the team. Step up! 

[Milanos Milano]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

Oh so it wasn’t the superior opponent who was the reason he won it….it was the inferior opponent making mistakes.

 

I see how your mind thinks now.  

Not necessarily. Sometimes superior talent makes mistakes against a nearly equal talent. But then again, that should be factored into overall talent. Because how can you be superior if you can’t win more consistently if you are truly “more talented” . If you have 2 players that can each run 4.45s , you want the player who can run 4.45s the most consistently and that’s a skill. Same with QBs or any position. 

[nedboy7]

10 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

This year, it was McChoke.  We had the team and the personnel, he blew it.  SBXXV - We had the better team/personnel.  Jim Kelly needed to give the ball to Thurman, but insisted on continuing to pass into a defense designed to stop that.  I lay the game on Kelly, and also Marvcus, for not getting Jimbo to do what needed to be done.  SBXXVI and SBXXVII, we were overmatched.  SBXXVIII, another game we should have won, but Thurman quitting after the fumble six doomed us.  I lay that one on Thurman.

 

Your blame game is strong.  Well done. 

[Milanos Milano]

1 minute ago, Beerball said:

Player execution (I'm for it) & scheme/strategy are two, maybe three very different things. Lumping them together and then adding coaching to the mix a'int right.

But isn’t coaching responsible in some ways to player execution? Or is that strictly under talent performance? If a player can consistently perform, is that a coaching issue or a talent issue? 
 

True or false, can a coach win with inferior talent if they are a superior coach with better strategy? 
How much can a coach, coach up? Preparedness? Situational awareness? Statistical advantages under certain situations that are diagnosed in real time? 

[Beerball]

2 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

But isn’t coaching responsible in some ways to player execution? Or is that strictly under talent performance? If a player can consistently perform, is that a coaching issue or a talent issue? 
 

True or false, can a coach win with inferior talent if they are a superior coach with better strategy? 
How much can a coach, coach up? Preparedness? Situational awareness? Statistical advantages under certain situations that are diagnosed in real time? 

IMO, good coaching can win you a game or two/year. Bad coaching and bad player execution can lose them all.

 

Players deserve some of the blame. Whether it wide right and the partying ways of the 90's Bills or Homerun throwback (equal coaching and player IMO) or 13 seconds (communication which is on coaching, scheme which is coaching, poor tackling which is player) the FO put together tremendous teams. Coaches and players didn't do their part.

[Milanos Milano]

Just now, Beerball said:

IMO, good coaching can win you a game or two/year. Bad coaching and bad player execution can lose them all.

 

Players deserve some of the blame. Whether it wide right and the partying ways of the 90's Bills or Homerun throwback (equal coaching and player IMO) or 13 seconds (communication which is on coaching, scheme which is coaching, poor tackling which is player) the FO put together tremendous teams. Coaches and players didn't do their part.

Are we certain this is the absolute case though? We haven’t even decided what is the best ways to gauge player talent and overall roster grades. We have a punter that was ranked last, a QB ranked in the top 3 in most metrics (despite poor linemen talent), and other players I’m not sure were they finished in statistical quartiles compared to other league players. We need to find a way to weight all of that when determining how good our talent is before we can start placing blame on coaching. 

[nedboy7]

3 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

But isn’t coaching responsible in some ways to player execution? Or is that strictly under talent performance? If a player can consistently perform, is that a coaching issue or a talent issue? 
 

True or false, can a coach win with inferior talent if they are a superior coach with better strategy? 
How much can a coach, coach up? Preparedness? Situational awareness? Statistical advantages under certain situations that are diagnosed in real time? 

 

True of False..... McBeane have built a solid team from ground up with their talent acquisition, coaching and overall team concepts to make an irrelevant mediocre franchise a perennial SB contender that we can enjoy and be proud of year after year, instead of talking about our draft position. 

[Milanos Milano]

Just now, nedboy7 said:

 

True of False..... McBeane have built a solid team from ground up with their talent acquisition, coaching and overall team concepts to make an irrelevant mediocre franchise a perennial SB contender that we can enjoy and be proud of year after year, instead of talking about our draft position. 

False. Because they have failed to WIN Super Bowls. That’s why we play the game. Whether we are the Jets or super bowl losers is the same. Both pack up and go home. While it’s a great moral victory, it still isn’t enough and for that we need to figure out why? Why wasn’t it enough. Not good enough coaching or not good enough talent. 

[YoloinOhio]

I blame the FO for not signing the Sparty legend 

 

Edited March 12, 2022 by YoloinOhio

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

1 hour ago, IronMaidenBills said:

 

NFL is hard. Is that what you are trying to tell me? 

So is proper use of an apostrophe.

Edited March 12, 2022 by Ridgewaycynic2013

[Thurman#1]

15 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

 

Statistical analysis isn’t subjective. Data is data. On paper the pats had more talent. I can’t say for certain because we haven’t discussed what is the best way in determining roster talent success. So if the pats had the better roster at that time, then that means the giants had better coaching to win the super bowl. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Seen Moe and Larry lately?

[First Round Bust]

overall - Ralph Wilson and his bad management and style - old school, stubborn, egotistical; fired a hall-of-fame GM in his prime and overwhelming majority of his hires were terrible, it took 50 years for him to be inducted in the hall, mostly because it made the NFL look bad not to, not because he deserved it. 

[Milanos Milano]

Well we know one thing, we can’t blame the Pegula’s for the lack of spending money. They have been adamant about spending up to the max cap. They have the final stamp of approval though on Beane and McDermott, so that discussion is still viable. But you can’t fault them for a lack of trying like Ralph seemed to lack sometimes. 

2 minutes ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said:

So is proper use of an apostrophe.

So we resort to ad hominem now instead of content discussions? You are better than that. 

[Thurman#1]

4 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

False. Because they have failed to WIN Super Bowls. That’s why we play the game. Whether we are the Jets or super bowl losers is the same. Both pack up and go home. While it’s a great moral victory, it still isn’t enough and for that we need to figure out why? Why wasn’t it enough. Not good enough coaching or not good enough talent. 

 

 

You're doing it again. Refusing to believe the obvious. 

 

Enjoy the personal little Bizarro world you're going to be living in.

[Dr. K]

1 hour ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Bills under Pegula’s. Sorry, should have been more clear. I want to try and make this as less subjective as possible. Where would you rank our overall talent acquisition across the league? 6th, 3rd, 1st? And what gauge should we use? Statistical quartiles analysis weighted based on positional importance? 
 

Where do we rank McDermott in coaching performance league wide? 10th, 7th, 3rd, etc? What statistical performance gauge are we using to judge coaches? I seriously want to know where we should be placing blame mathematically. 

Any answer to this question is going to be subjective--especially when you frame it the way you did, which slants the answer toward blaming the coaching.

 

This is an incredibly passive aggressive way to start another anti-McDermott thread. Why not just come out and say you blame McDermott for the Bills not winning a Super Bowl and call for his firing? 

Edited March 12, 2022 by Dr. K

[Milanos Milano]

3 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

 

Seen Moe and Larry lately?

So statistically we didn’t have the worst punter in the league talent wise? So statistically we didn’t have the top 3 QB in the league talent wise? What about other positions on the team? 

[nedboy7]

6 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

False. Because they have failed to WIN Super Bowls. That’s why we play the game. Whether we are the Jets or super bowl losers is the same. Both pack up and go home. While it’s a great moral victory, it still isn’t enough and for that we need to figure out why? Why wasn’t it enough. Not good enough coaching or not good enough talent. 

 

Did you fail to become a millionaire because your parents were incompetent or because you were too lazy to apply your true potential.  It has to be one or the other. 

[BarleyNY]

43 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

So applied across all team positions, where would the bills rank in overall roster talent in the league? Thanks for your honest attempt here at being critical. I appreciate that. 

Last season they were top 5 across the board from what I’ve seen.  The team isn’t perfect, but I think that legit.  Also ELO is another good metric.  Here are some links:

 

https://www.nfeloapp.com/nfl-power-ratings

 

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2021-nfl-predictions/

 

Explanation of EPA:

https://www.thescore.com/nfl/news/2193857/amp

 

I think the most important part of using any statistic or metric is to understand its limitations.  People rip on PFF a lot, but their grades are useful in context.  They are grading players on how well they execute their assigned duties within their scheme.  That’s much different than asking how much a player is capable of.   Players like Kirk Cousins (6th) and Allen (3rd) were not really that close as QBs last season.  Cousins operated well in a limited role within a scheme that asked him to be efficient - and he was.  But compared to what the Bills asked of Allen and his outsized role in his offense, there’s no real comparison.  

[Draconator]

1 hour ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Please discuss as honestly as you can. 

 

After further consideration, the blue helmet is really, really disturbing. 

[Milanos Milano]

1 minute ago, Dr. K said:

Any answer to this question is going to be subjective--especially when you frame it the way you did, which slants the answer toward blaming the coaching.

 

Why not just come out and say you blame McDermott for the Bills not winning a Super Bowl yet? 

Because how can I blame McDermott if we can at least come to some approximate gauge to what is roster talent rankings? We need to be able to determine a good metric before we can start placing blame on coaching. What we do know is we have a top 3 QB statistically despite having below average line play. Which is really incredible to think about. 

[Thurman#1]

4 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

So statistically we didn’t have the worst punter in the league talent wise? So statistically we didn’t have the top 3 QB in the league talent wise? What about other positions on the team? 

 

 

Sorry, man, your whole argument here has all the logical validity of a guy saying, "Well, this is a fruit. Therefore we've proved that if it isn't an apple, it must be an orange." And then parading around and basking in the imaginary huzzahs he figures that deserves.

 

At this point, it's very clear that you simply don't get it but are willing to argue forever. Honestly worse than talking to my six year old.

 

When she was three years younger.

 

I'm out.

 

 

Edited March 12, 2022 by Thurman#1

[Don Otreply]

  I’m gonna go have another cup of coffee and check back in later to see if y’all get this resolved 👍 

 

Go Bills!!!

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

1 minute ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Well we know one thing, we can’t blame the Pegula’s for the lack of spending money. They have been adamant about spending up to the max cap. They have the final stamp of approval though on Beane and McDermott, so that discussion is still viable. But you can’t fault them for a lack of trying like Ralph seemed to lack sometimes. 

So we resort to ad hominem now instead of content discussions? You are better than that. 

I just find it ironic when a poster (especially an OP) goes on a tirade about the lack of success under Beane and McDermott.  As long as you're not signing the paycheques for Beane, McDermott, and others, the Pegulas (just plural, no possessive apostrophe needed) must be satisfied.

[Rochesterfan]

1 hour ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Bills under Pegula’s. Sorry, should have been more clear. I want to try and make this as less subjective as possible. Where would you rank our overall talent acquisition across the league? 6th, 3rd, 1st? And what gauge should we use? Statistical quartiles analysis weighted based on positional importance? 
 

Where do we rank McDermott in coaching performance league wide? 10th, 7th, 3rd, etc? What statistical performance gauge are we using to judge coaches? I seriously want to know where we should be placing blame mathematically. 

 

Where is crappy fans that question everything.  
 

I think the lack of Super Bowls is directly related to you as a fan.  
 

Your negativity caused angst and created the issue - you are the reason - plain and simple.

 

JHC - what garbage.